Law:

Section:

(a) Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913)-------Ss. 4 & 21---Pre-emption suit---Divisible transaction---Determination of---In order to see whether the transaction is divisible, sale-deed as also endorsement of Registrar made thereon is to be looked at---Intention of the parties at the time of concluding the sale can be gathered from the contents of sale-deeds as also the endorsement of the Registrar to see as to whether the shares of the parties have been specified and described therein and that the sale price has been contributed in accordance with the shares or whether the same had been paid in lump sum---Where neither the shares of the vendees were specified in the sale-deed, nor the consideration was received by the vendors in proportion to the shares rather it was paid in lump sum, such sale was not divisible. (b) Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913)--- ----Ss. 4 & 21---Pre-emption suit---Divisible transaction---Intention of parties---Factors determining such intention---Statement of the vendees contrary to sale-deed---Value of---Real intention of the contracting parties to the `sale agreement is to be gathered from the sale-deed itself and is not to be determined by an act or conduct of the vendees subsequent thereto. (c) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Arts. 102 & 103---Documentary evidence to exclude oral evidence--­Contradicting contents of documents by oral evidence---Validity---Oral---evidence led to contradict the contents of a document would be inadmissible in view of the provisions contained in Arts.102 & 103 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984. Maghi v. Narain and others 6 P.R. 1914 ref. (d) Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913)--- ----Ss. 4 & 21---Right of pre-emption ---Doctrine of sinker ---Applicability--­Joint transaction indivisible transaction---Joining stranger to the transaction---One of the vendees had received his share from the pre-emptor and made statement in favour of the pre-emptor but later on had stated that the sale was not joint and the transaction was divisible---Contention of the contesting vendee was that the transaction was divisible and doctrine of sinker was not applicable to the transaction…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492