1987 PLP 29 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD AMIN SHAH‑‑Petitioner Versus HAJI MUHAMMAD‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1987 PLP 29 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | S. A. Nusrat and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AMIN SHAH‑‑Petitioner Versus HAJI MUHAMMAD‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 29 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 PLP 29 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: S. A. Nusrat and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 29 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD AMIN SHAH‑‑Petitioner Versus HAJI MUHAMMAD‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Sher Alam, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Syed Inayat Hussain Shah, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 14th February, 1987.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court, dated 5‑10‑1986 in Civil Revision No. 2157 of 1985). ‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Punjab Pre‑emption Act (I of 1913), S. 15‑‑Suit for pre‑emption‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider contentions (i) that in view of decision of Supreme Court in P L D 1986 SC 360 it was not open to respondent to claim superior right on basis of relationship with vendors and (ii) respondent could not be treated as a person entitled to inherit land within meaning of CI. thirdly of S.15(b), Punjab Pre‑emption Act. Government of N.‑W.F.P. v. Malik Said Kamal Shah P L D 1986 SC 360 cited.
Judgment & Decree
Mian Sher Alam, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Syed Inayat Hussain Shah, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondent. Date of hearing: 14th February, 1987. SAAD SAOOD JAN. J.‑‑This is a petition for special leave to appeal and it arises in the following circumstances. 2.Mst. Rabia Bibi and ten others sold 21 Kanals of land by a registered deed dated 10‑12‑1979 to the petitioner. On 16‑12‑1980 the respondent filed a suit for pre‑emption claiming that he was a son of Mst. Rabia Bibi and a relations of the other ten vendors. The suit was decreed on 18‑7‑1982 by the Civil Judge, IInd Class, Gujrat. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Additional District Judge which was dismissed on 13‑10‑1985. The petitioner then filed a revision petition in the High Court. A learned Single Judge found that with regard to three of the vendors the respondent could not be regarded as a person who could inherit their property. Accordingly he dismissed the suit in so far as the shares of these vendors were concerned but dismissed the revision petition with regard to the shares of the other vendors. The petitioner now seeks leave to appeal against the decree granted to the respondent. 3.In support of this petition two grounds have been raised: ‑ (i) in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Government of N.‑W.F.P. v. Malik Said Kamal Shah P L D 1986 S C 360 it was not open to the respondent to claim superior right on the basis of relationship with the vendors; and (ii) the respondent could not be treated as a person entitled to inherit land within the meaning of clause thirdly of section 15 (b) of the Pre‑emption Act, as applicable to Muslims, with regard to his maternal‑aunts, maternal‑cousins and the husbands of the maternal‑aunts. Both these contentions need consideration. We grant leave to appeal to the petitioner. Security in the sum of Rs.2,
500. The appeal may be made ready on the present record with liberty to the parties to add such documents as they may consider necessary. The order with regard to maintenance of status quo shall continue. S.Q./M‑42/S??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Leave to appeal granted.