Case Details

Citation(s)
2003 SLG 2697 2003 SLD 2697 2003 CLC 1434
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 604/D of 1996, heard on 11-03-2003.
MUHAMMAD AKHTAR SHABBIR, J

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

MAHRAM KHAN-

VS

FATEH KHAN and 3 others

Law:

Section:

(a) Punjab Pre-emption Act (IX of 1991)-------S. 24---Pre-emption suit---Period for deposit of one-third (Zar-e-Soim) of the sale price of property not to be more than 30 days from the date of filing of the suit---Said period having been fixed by the statute itself could not be extended by the Court. Muhammad Ismail v. Jamil-ur-Rehman and 6 others 1995 MLD 1011 and Mst. Wafa Jan v. Mahram Zed 1995 CLC 2002 ref. (b) Punjab Pre-emption Act (IX of 1991)--- ----Ss. 13 & 24---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.11 & O.XXIII, R.1 ---Pre-emption suit---Trial Court directed the plaintiff to deposit one-third (Zar-e-Soim) of the sale price---Plaintiff adopted the way of withdrawing the suit for filing a fresh one due to non-deposit of one-third Zar-e-Soim and the suit was dismissed as withdrawn for his default--­Effect---Enforcement of pre-emption right according to S.13 of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991 could only be made once and dismissal of suit for non-deposit of Zar-e-Soim of the sale price had the effect of barring a fresh suit---Dismissal of suit under S.24 of Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991 finally determined the right of the parties subject to the decision of the appeal or revision. Haji Janat Gul Khan v. Haji Faqir Muhammad Khan PLD 1993 SC 204 ref. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 115---Revision---Scope---High Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction is competent to take suo motu notice of the legal defect even if the party had not filed cross-objection. (d) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 100---Second appeal ---Suit against respondent having been dismissed by Courts below he was entitled to support the decree even by attacking points decided against him. Salahuddin Butt v. Punjab Service Tribunal PLD 1989 SC 597; Munir Hussain v. Abdul Hameed 1995 MLD 1596; Syed Mustafa Kamal Shah v. Syed Feroze Shah 1992 CLC 355 and Syed Ali Raza v. Aurangzeb Khan 1987 CLC 1829 ref. (e) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XLI, R. 22---Cross-objection---If the respondent had not taken cross-objection to urge in opposition of the appeal, objection if accepted would result in total dismissal of the suit---Question of jurisdiction…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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