| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2009 SLG 549 2009 SLD 549 2009 CLC 880 |
Peshawar High Court
Civil Revision No.293 of 2004, decision dated: 16-12-2008
MUHAMMAD ALAM KHAN, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Revision No.293 of 2004, decision dated: 16-12-2008
MUHAMMAD ALAM KHAN, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
MUHAMMAD AFZAL
VS
ALLAH BAKHSH and 2 others
Law: North West Frontier Province Preemption Act, (X of 1987)
Section: 13
Law: North West Frontier Province Preemption Act, (X of 1987)
Section: 13
North-West Frontier Province Pre-emption Act (X of 1987)-------Ss. 6 & 13---Suit for pre-emption---Making of Talbs---Suit filed by the plaintiff having concurrently been dismissed by the Trial Court and Appellate Court, plaintiff had filed revision against said concurrent s---Sale transaction in respect of suit-land was incorporated in mutation and possession thereof was handed over to defendant/vendee and plaintiff had admitted that fact---Witness of the plaintiff had admitted the fact that the moment possession of suit-land was delivered to the defendant/vendee, he informed the plaintiff regarding the impugned sale and the factum of possession was duly entered in Khasra Girdawari in the capacity of vendee/purchaser--Plaintiff who was in the know of the transaction, had failed to perform the statutory demands in time and his right stood extinguished under S.13 of the North-West Frontier Province Pre-emption Act, 1987 - Record had revealed that the plaintiff while filing the suit had not mentioned the date, time, place and name of the informer in the plaint nor the same was proved in evidence---Date, time, place and name of the informer must be mentioned in the plaint specifically and should also be proved during evidence---Having not done so in the case the demands had not been complied with--Two courts below had recorded concurrent findings of fact---No misreading and non-reading had been pointed out by the counsel for the plaintiff so as to warrant interference by the High Court in its revisional jurisdiction --Revision petition was dismissed, in circumstances. Kala Khan v. Ayub Khan 1992 MLD 536; Taj Malook. V. Mst. Zaitoon and others PLD 1994 SC 356; Amir Jan v. Ghulam Muhammad PLD 1997 SC 883; Din Muhammad v. Subedar M. Zaman 2001 SCMR 1952; Muhammad Iqbal v. Ali Sher 2008 SCMR 1682; Abdur Rahim and another v. Mst. Jantay Bibi and others 2000 SCMR 346; Haji Muhammad Din, v. Malik Muhammad Abdullah PLD 1994 SC 291 and Muhammad Rasheed Ahmad v. Muhammad Siddique PLD 2002 SC 293 rel. Nasrullah Khan for Petitioner. Khuda Bakhsh Khan Baloch for Respondent. Date of hearing: 15th December, 2008. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD ALAM KHAN, J.--- Muhammad Afzal has brought…
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