| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2001 SLG 2537 2001 SLD 2537 2001 CLC 1303 |
Lahore High Court
Regular Second Appeal No. 113 of 1983, decision dated: 23rd May, 2001, hearing DATE : 4-05-2001
ALI NAWAZ CHOWHAN, J
Razzaq A. Mirza and Muhammad Munir Paracha for Appellants. Bashir Ahmad Ansari for
Respondents
Regular Second Appeal No. 113 of 1983, decision dated: 23rd May, 2001, hearing DATE : 4-05-2001
ALI NAWAZ CHOWHAN, J
Razzaq A. Mirza and Muhammad Munir Paracha for Appellants. Bashir Ahmad Ansari for
Respondents
ELAHI BUX and others
VS
Syed BAQIR BOKHARI and others
Law:
Section:
Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913)-------S. 21-A---Pre-emption suit---Improvement of status through inheritance by the vendee ---Provisions of S.21-A, Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913 speaks of the improvement of status through inheritance by the vendee himself and not by his legal heirs who, upon his death, inherit his status as the preemptor in substitution while they may be also having their own status and ownership. JUDGMENT Through this regular second appeal, the findings given by Mr. A.M. Tiwana, learned District Judge, Attock, dated 2-7-1983, in Civil Appeal No.186 of 1982, is being questioned. Whereby the learned District Judge had reversed the findings given by Mr. Mehmood Khalid, learned Civil Judge First Class, Talagang, dated 15-6-1979. Whereby he had decreed the suit holding that the plaintiffs had a superior right of pre-emption against the vendees/defendants. They were directed to pay the balance price and also to make good the deficient court-fee. 2. The subject-matter of the suit is land measuring 497 Kanals, 1 Marla, located in the area of Village Shaghar. The pre-emptor's case was that they were collaterals of the vendor. They had also challenged the ostensible price which was fixed at Rs.72,000 while stating that only Rs.20,000 was paid. 3. The case of the vendees was that the transaction was in fact a gift and not a sale. They had also denied the superior right of pre-emption of the plaintiffs. 4. Defendants Nos.4 and 5 who were tenants, had also filed a suit for 'pre-emption in the Court of Collector on ground of tenancy as this right existed then and were implicated as a party under the order of the Court. 5. Regarding the question whether the transaction was a gift or a sale, there are concurrent findings on fact on this issue and it was held that the transaction was a sale. Anyway, this matter was not argued before this Court neither there was any argument with respect to the sale price. 6. The main argument before this Court was that the learned First Appellate Court while deciding Issue No.5 erred in law and in interpretation of section 21-A of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913, while holding that the vendees have improved their title…
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