Law: North West Frontier Province Preemption Act, (X of 1987)

Section: 6,13,24,28,24(1)

North-West Frontier Province Pre-emption Act (X of 1987)--- ----Ss. 6, 13, 24 & 28---Suit for pre-emption---Depositing 1/3rd of pre-emption money---Determination of market price of suit land---Defendants/vendees in impugned registered sale-deed mentioned Rs.80,000 as sale consideration, which was disputed by the plaintiff in his plaint pleading that sale was actually struck at Rs.15,000---Plaintiff who was directed to deposit 1/3rd of pre-emption money, deposited Rs.5,000 considering sale consideration as Rs.15,000 and not Rs.26,666/67, 1/3rd of Rs.80,000 as claimed by the defendants---On application of defendants that plaintiff had deposited deficient money, both the Trial Court and Appellate Court dismissed suit on the ground that plaintiff had not complied with the provisions of S.24(1) North-West Frontier Province Pre-emption Act, 1987---Validity---Amount of Rs.80,000 as alleged by the vendees/defendants, was disputed by the plaintiff, claiming that bargain was struck for Rs.15,000, provisions of S.28 of the North-West Frontier Province Pre-emption Act, 1987, was to come in play; which had made incumbent upon the Trial Court to determine the market value of the suit property at the time of final adjudication, when sale consideration was disputed---When the sale price stood disputed in the plaint, the court could not be deemed absolved from its important duty to clearly mention the specific amount required to be deposited by the pre-emptor within the given time in compliance of S.24(1) of the North-West Frontier Province Pre-emption Act, 1987---In the present case, mistake in deposit of 1/3rd of sale consideration was to be attributed to the act of the court as well as the office of the court---Even otherwise plaintiff/pre-emptor could not be non-suited for short deposit of pre-emption money due to mistake op the part of the office of the court---Plaintiff/pre-emptor could not be non-suited for short deposit of pre-emption money due to confusing order of the Trial Court---Concurrent s of the courts below, were illegal exercise of jurisdiction and were set aside---Parties were directed to appear in the Trial Court, which would inform the plaintiff about…

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