Case Details

Citation(s)
2007 SLG 1544 2007 SLD 1544 2007 SCMR 1566
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No.317 and Civil Petition No.784 of 2001, decision dated: 7-03-2007. (On appeal from the judgment, dated 20-2-2001 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Regular Second Appeals Nos. 37 and 82 of 1988)
SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN AND RAJA FAYYAZ AHMAD, JJ
Kh. Muhammad Farooq, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants/Petitioners (in both cases). Mian Allah Nawaz, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents (in both cases)

MUHAMMAD ZARAT end others

VS

AKBAR ALI through L.Rs. and others

Law:

Section:

Land Reforms Regulation, 1.972 (M.L.R. 115)--- ----Para. 25(3)(d)---Punjab Pre-emption Act (1 of 1913), 5.15---Superior right of pre-emption---Doctrine of sinker---Applicability---Out of two vendees only one was tenant on the suit-land while the other joined him and both purchased the suit-land jointly---Trial Court decreed the suit in favour of pre-emptors which decree was maintained by High Court in second appeal---Plea raised by vendees was that principle of sinker was not applicable to the suits filed under M.L.R.115---Validity---Tenant-had been granted a superior right of pre-emption, under para.25(3)(d) of M.L.R. ,115, regarding land under his tenancy, no more and no less---Only difference was that if a tenant had exercised such right as pre-emptor, he would resort to Revenue Court which to all intents and purposes, would exercise. the powers of a Civil Court---Such superior light was to be read impliedly as part of S.15 of Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913---So far as remaining principles of pre-emption, like limitation, waiver sinker were concerned, those were applied to a tenant as well, whether emanating Prom text lam or from the case-law---Tenant, therefore, if defendant, could not escape from the clutches of-the principle of sinker---High Court had rightly noted that tenant joined a Stranger with him, therefore, he had to sink with that stranger---Both having purchased the land in equal share and both being co-sharers in each and every inch of the laud, the transaction was not divisible so as to save the share of tenant---Supreme Court declined to interfere with the judgment and decree passed by High Court---Appeal was dismissed. Malhi Khan's case PLD 1991 SC 824 and Muhammad Khan's case PLD 1981 SC 155 ref. JUDGMENT SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, J. --- Both, the appeal as well as civil petition for leave to appeal, arising out of the same .judgment, are taken up together. 2. Muhammad Zarat and Muhammad Nawaz purchased land measuring 212 Kanals, in equal shares for a sum of Rs.2,29,000 through registered sale-deed, dated 2-12-1975. Akbar Ali and Mehr Din, sons of Sardar Khan pre-empted the sale which was defended by the vendees on the ground of being…
🔒
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