| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2002 SLG 1861 2002 SLD 1861 2002 CLC 749 |
Supreme Court (AJ&K)
Civil Appeal No.27 of 2001, decision dated: 9-07-2001. (On appeal from the judgment and decree of the High Court, dated 30-10-2000 in Civil Appeal No.34 of 1999)
SARDAR SAID MUHAMMAD KHAN, C.J. AND MUHAMMAD YUNUS SURAKHVI, J
Imdad Ali Mallick, Advocate for Appellant. Ashfaque Hussain Kiani, Advocate for
Respondents
Civil Appeal No.27 of 2001, decision dated: 9-07-2001. (On appeal from the judgment and decree of the High Court, dated 30-10-2000 in Civil Appeal No.34 of 1999)
SARDAR SAID MUHAMMAD KHAN, C.J. AND MUHAMMAD YUNUS SURAKHVI, J
Imdad Ali Mallick, Advocate for Appellant. Ashfaque Hussain Kiani, Advocate for
Respondents
MUHAMMAD RASHID KHAN
VS
NOOR MUHAMMAD KHAN and 2 others
Law:
Section:
(a) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Right of Prior Purchase Act, 1993 (B.K.)- -----S. 14---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XIII, R.1---Suit for pre-emption---Non-exhibiting of document which otherwise was admissible in evidence---Copies of documents showing that plaintiff was co-sharer in suit-land were appended by plaintiff with plaint and defendant was fully aware of said documents ,placed on record by plaintiff---Attested copies of said documents having been admitted and read into evidence by Trial Court and Appellate Court without any objection, same could not be excluded from evidence merely because same were not exhibited ---Non-exhibiting of a document which was otherwise admissible in evidence, was merely an irregularity and would not render such a document as inadmissible in evidence---Observations of High Court regarding inadmissibility of documents produced by plaintiffs along with plaint, were set aside by the Supreme Court. Tariq Mehmood v. Muhammad Asghar 1990 CLC 1214; Natha Khan v. Mst. Rehmat Bibi PLD 1960 Lah. 96; Muhammad Ashraf v. Syed Ghulam Murtaza and others NLR 1992 CU 707 and Abdul Karim v. Muhammad Sughram and others Civil Appeal No.185 of 2000 ref. (b) Question of fact--- ----Proof---Substantial question of fact which would go to the root of the case and stood admitted by opposite party, needs not be proved. Ch. Abdul Karim and others v. Raja Muhammad Nisar and another 1998 SCR 296 ref. (c) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Right of Prior Purchase Act, 1993 (B.K.)-- ----S. 14---Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), S.42---Suit for pre-emption ---Raising the point for the first time before Supreme Court---Admissibility---Contention raised by defendants/ appellants that it was enjoined upon plaintiffs/respondents to prove their right of prior purchase at three stages; at time of sale; at time of institution of suit and at time of passing of decree by Trial Court, could not be considered because such contention was never raised in any of Courts below nor before the High Court---Effect---Point which was not pressed before High Court, could not be allowed to be raised before Supreme Court. (d) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Right of…
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