| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2003 SLG 3301 2003 SLD 3301 2003 PLD 398 |
Lahore High Court
Regular Second Appeal No. 363 of 1972, heard on 16th October, 2002
MUHAMMAD KHALID ALVI, J
Hameed Azhar Malik for the Appellants. Kanwar Intizar Muhammad Khan for
Respondents
Regular Second Appeal No. 363 of 1972, heard on 16th October, 2002
MUHAMMAD KHALID ALVI, J
Hameed Azhar Malik for the Appellants. Kanwar Intizar Muhammad Khan for
Respondents
SIKANDAR KHAN and 3 others
VS
MUHAMMAD ASHRAF and another
Law:
Section:
(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-------O. XLI, R.1---High Court (Lahore) Rules and Orders, Vol. V, Chap. 1-A, R.9---Defect in appeal---Office objection, removal of---No time fixed by Office for re-filing---Appeal re-filed without unnecessary delay could not be said to have gone out of limitation---Appeal once validly instituted within prescribed time of limitation, mere technical office objection could not take away vested right of litigant. PLD 1972 Lah. 743; PLD 1996 Lah. 702 and 1991 CLC 269 ref. 2000 SCMR 847; 2000 SCMR 847 and 1990 SCMR 859 rel. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 149---Deficiency of court-fee, making up---Effect---If deficiency in court-fee was made good under orders of Court, even though beyond period of limitation, same would not make suit time-barred. PLD 1984 SC 289; 1994 SCMR 367; 1986 SCMR 1005 and 1986 SCMR 1345 ref. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 149---Deficiency of court-fee---Grant of time---Duty of Court: First to determine amount of court-fee leviable and then grant time to plaintiff to make good the same. (d) Precedent-- ---Latest interpretation of law would apply to cases under consideration. (e) Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913)--- ----S. 15---West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), S. 56---Preemption suit---Agricultural or non-agricultural land---Determination---Fact that particular land was a "land revenue paying" or not, was one of the considerations to determine status of land, whether same was agricultural or non-agricultural---Such fact was not the only consideration on which status of land could be determined finally---Exempting agricultural land from land revenue would not mean that such land had lost its agricultural status---Big chunk of land acquired by pre-emptor in different rectangles in a village agricultural body could not be said to be non-agricultural land in absence of any evidence about use of such land for purpose other than agricultural. JUDGMENT Brief facts of the case are that one Abdul Wahid Khan sold land measuring 118 Kanals and 19 Marlas situated in village Karror Thal Kalan, Tehsil and District Layyah to respondents through registered sale-deed dated…
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