1994SCMR1879 (PLP)
NAZIR BEGUM and 5 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus FAZAL DAD and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1994SCMR1879 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Shafiur Rahman and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | NAZIR BEGUM and 5 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus FAZAL DAD and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Punjab Pre‑emption Act (I of 1913)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994SCMR1879 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Pre‑emption Act (I of 1913)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994SCMR1879 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Shafiur Rahman and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994SCMR1879 (PLP) (NAZIR BEGUM and 5 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus FAZAL DAD and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Hussain Awan, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhary, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Date of hearing: 20th July, 1993.
- Hamid Adam Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record and CA. Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court for the Caveator.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment/order of Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 31‑3‑1992 in Civil Revision No. 2069 of 1989). ‑‑‑‑S. 15‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 (3)‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted to consider contention of the petitioner that suit for pre‑emption having once been decreed, even though ex parte before the target date (i.e. 31‑7‑1986) there was no bar to a decree being granted even after the target date. Government of N.‑W.F.P. v. Said Kamal Shah PLD 1986 SC 360 and Sardar Ali v. Muhammad Ali PLD 1988 SC 287 ref. Bahadur Khan v. Muhammad Yousaf 1992 SCMR 2117 and Ghulam Rasool v. Faiz Bakhsh 1992 SCMR 1328 Tel. Hamid Adam Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record and CA. Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court for the Caveator.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑S. 15‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 (3)‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted to consider contention of the petitioner that suit for pre‑emption having once been decreed, even though ex parte before the target date (i.e. 31‑7‑1986) there was no bar to a decree being granted even after the target date. Government of N.‑W.F.P. v. Said Kamal Shah PLD 1986 SC 360 and Sardar Ali v. Muhammad Ali PLD 1988 SC 287 ref. Bahadur Khan v. Muhammad Yousaf 1992 SCMR 2117 and Ghulam Rasool v. Faiz Bakhsh 1992 SCMR 1328 Tel. Muhammad Hussain Awan, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhary, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners. Hamid Adam Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record and CA. Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court for the Caveator. Date of hearing: 20th July, 1993. SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑‑By a registered deed dated 29‑4‑1968 respondent No.h purchased 61 Kanals and 18 Marlas of agricultural land situate in Chak Aggo of Tehsil Gujranwala for a sum of Rs.23,
250. On 26‑4‑1969 Khan Muhammad Khan, predecessor‑in‑interest of ‑the petitioners, brought a suit for pre‑emption, claiming that not only he was a collateral of the vendors but also a co‑sharer in the Khata of which the land in dispute formed a part. The suit was decreed ex parte on 10‑9‑1969. Subsequently, the ex parte decree was set aside. On 31‑7‑1988 the trial Court dismissed the suit on the ground that no decree could be passed in favour of the pre‑emptors after 31‑7‑1986 as ruled in the cases of Government of N: W.F.P. v. Said Kamal Shah (PLD 1986 SC 360) and Sardar Ali y. Muhammad Ali (PLD 1988 SC 287). The petitioners fled an appeal before the District Judge, Gujranwala, and a revision petition before the High Court but these were dismissed. They now seek leave to anneal from this Court:
2. In support of this petition it is contended that after their suit has once been decreed, even though ex parte, there was no bar to a decree being passed in favour even after 31‑7‑1986. In support of this contention reliance is being placed upon two judgments of this Court reported as Bahadur Khan v. Muhammad Yousaf (1992 SCMR 2117) and Ghulam Rasool v. Faiz Bakhsh (1992 SCMR 1328). AA./N‑382/S. Leave granted.