| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2003 SLG 414 2003 SLD 414 2003 CLC 1764 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 949-D of 1994, heard on 16-04-2003
MUHAMMAD KHALID ALVI, JUSTICE
Kanwar Akhtar Ali for Petitioner. M. R. Khalid for
Respondent.
Civil Revision No. 949-D of 1994, heard on 16-04-2003
MUHAMMAD KHALID ALVI, JUSTICE
Kanwar Akhtar Ali for Petitioner. M. R. Khalid for
Respondent.
ABDUL MAJEED KHAN
VS
ABDUL QADEER
Law: Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991
Section: 6
Punjab Pre-emption Act (IX of 1991)--Ss. 6 & 13---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S.12---West Pakistan General Clauses Act (VI of 1956), S.8---Suit for pre-emption---Making of Talb-e-Ishhad--- Limitation---Plaintiff who acquired knowledge of sale of suit-land on 23-6-1992, had dispatched notice of Talb-e-Ishhad on 7-7-1992---Both Courts below dismissed suit 'on ground that Talb-e-Ishhad had been dispatched by plaintiff after expiry of one day from period of two weeks as provided under S.13, Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991---Validity---If the day of acquiring knowledge of sale which was 23-6-1992 was excluded, notice issued by plaintiff on 7-7-1992 would come to be on the fourteenth day which would fall within two weeks as provided under S.13(3) of Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991--Subsections (1) & (2) of S.12 of Limitation Act, 1908 had provided that for computing period of limitation, the day on which the impugned was pronounced, would be excluded from counting towards period of limitation---Subsection (3) of S.13 of Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991 also had provided that the day of knowledge of sale was not to be included towards count of two weeks time for the performance of Talbe-Ishhad---Notice of Talb-e-Ishhad issued on 7-7-1992, in circumstances, was within prescribed period of two weeks---Concurrent s and decrees passed by two Courts below were set aside by High Court in Revision. Muhammad Yousaf and others v. Zafar Ullah 1992 SCMR 117 and Manzoor Hussain Shah v. Fazal Dad and another 2000 SCMR 216 ref. JUDGMENT Through this single judgment I propose to dispose of Civil Revisions Nos.949-D and 950-D of 1994 as common questions of law and fact are involved in the said cases. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner filed two separate suits to pre-empt two different sales against the respondent. The suits were contested by the present respondent. After recording evidence of the parties the learned trial Court vide judgments and decrees, dated 29-5-1993 dismissed the suits filed by the present petitioner. The only findings given by the learned trial Court were on Issue No. 12 with A respect to the fulfillment of the requisite Talbs. The same was…
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