Law: Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991

Section: 13

Law: Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991

Section: 13

Punjab Pre-emption Act (IX of 1991)-------S. 13---Pre-emption suit---Performance of Talb-i-Muwathibat---Pre­emption suit dismissed but decreed in appeal---Minor discrepancies. in evidence---Effect---Perusal of record showed that pre-emptor lady was illiterate woman living in a remote area and her witnesses were also uneducated---Minor discrepancies were, therefore, not fatal to the testimony of such witnesses particularly when considerable period had elapsed in recording of their statements---Witnesses were unanimous on the period of duration, time and place of making of Talb-i-Muwathibat and they remained unshaken in cross-examination---Conclusion arrived at by Appellate Court held, was, in consonance with the evidence led by parties. Atiq-ur-Rehman through (real father) and another v. Muhammad Amin PLD 2006 SC 309; Haji Muhammad Saleem v. Khuda Bakhsh PLD 2003 SC 315; Muhammad Sarwar and others v. Hakim Ali 2004 CLC 1679 and Muhammad Ilyas and 4 others v. Walayat Hussain 2006 YLR 1153 distinguished. Altaf Hussain v. Abdul Hameed alias Abdul Majeed through Legal Heirs and another 2000 SCMR 314 and Hayat Muhammad and others v. Mazhar Hussain 2006 SCMR 1410 ref. Zia Ullah Khan Niazi for Petitioners. Mati Ullah Malik for Respondent. ORDER SYED ASGHAR HAIDER, J.--- This petition is directed against the judgment and decree, dated 26-4-2006 passed by the Additional District Judge, Mianwali, whereby the judgment and decree, dated 30-4-2004 passed by the Civil Judge, Mianwali, dismissing the suit was reversed. 2. The backdrop of the controversy is that the disputed property was owned by one Sher Muhammad, husband of respondent namely, Mst. Marrayam Bibi, he sold the land to one Muhammad Amir who later on sold the land to the petitioners on 25-9-1996, the respondent/plaintiff learnt about the sale on 1-1-1997 at 9 a.m. and made a declaration immediately submitting her superior right of pre-emption and sent notice of Talb-e-Ishhad as contemplated in law, thereafter she filed suit for possession through pre-emption. In the plaint, according to the respondent/plaintiff, the time, date and place was specifically mentioned. The suit was contested, of the divergent pleadings…

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