| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2004 SLG 946 2004 SLD 946 2004 SCMR 535 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
l No. 1252 of 1998, decision dated: 17-11-2003.(On appeal from the judgment dated 23 12 1997 of the Peshawar High Court, passed in Writ Petition No.1423 of 1997)
MUNIR A. SHEIKH, IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY AND RANA BHAGWANDAS, JJ
Mian Yunis Shah, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant.
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Ex parte. S. Masood Kausar, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent No. 3
l No. 1252 of 1998, decision dated: 17-11-2003.(On appeal from the judgment dated 23 12 1997 of the Peshawar High Court, passed in Writ Petition No.1423 of 1997)
MUNIR A. SHEIKH, IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY AND RANA BHAGWANDAS, JJ
Mian Yunis Shah, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant.
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Ex parte. S. Masood Kausar, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent No. 3
MUHAMMAD SHAH
VS
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, KOHAT and others
Law:
Section:
North West Frontier Province Pre emption Act (X of 1987)---S.31 Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199 Pre emption suit Non issuance of notice under S.31 of North West Frontier Province Pre emption Act, 1987, by Revenue Authorities Revisional jurisdiction of Appellate Court under S.115, C.P.C. Applicability Vendees sought rejection of the plaint being barred by limitation, as the same was filed 120 days after attestation of mutation by Revenue Authorities Pre emptor contended that the suit was filed from the date of his knowledge of the mutation as no notice was given by the Revenue Authorities as required under S.31 of the North West Frontier Province Pre emption Act, 1987 -Application for rejection of the plaint was dismissed by the Trial Court Appellate Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction rejected the suit being time barred and the was maintained by High Court in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction Validity Once the pre¬emptor, in the plaint, had expressly raised the question that the official. acts were not performed as provided under S.31 of North West Frontier Province Pre emption Act, 1987, it was imperative upon the Trial Court to frame an issue, allow the parties to lead evidence and thereafter to decide the controversy Order of the Trial Court was perfectly in accordance with law, therefore, it was not a fit case for interference under S.115, G.P.C. by the Appellate Court, as no irregularity amounting to illegality had been committed by the Trial Court in exercise of jurisdiction vested in it Judgment passed by High Court in Constitutional petition also suffered from same legal infirmity which could not be sustained Judgments passed by High Court and Appellate Court were set aside and that of Trial Court was restored Appeal was allowed. JUDGMENT MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J. This appeal by leave of the Court against judgment dated 23 12-1997 of a Division Bench of the Peshawar High Court through which Constitutional petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed, has arisen from a suit filed by him to pre empt the sale made through two mutations one for sale of the land and the other of mortgage. 2. The…
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