P L D 1988 Supreme Court 412 (PLP)
SHER MUHAMMAD and another‑Petitioners Versus ALLAH DITTA and 2 others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | P L D 1988 Supreme Court 412 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | SHER MUHAMMAD and another‑Petitioners Versus ALLAH DITTA and 2 others‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1988 Supreme Court 412 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1988 Supreme Court 412 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1988 Supreme Court 412 (PLP) (SHER MUHAMMAD and another‑Petitioners Versus ALLAH DITTA and 2 others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Hafiz Muhammad Yousaf, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab for Petitioners (in Civil Petition No.747 of 1983).
- M. M. Saeed Beg, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Inayat Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners (in Civil Petition No.754 of 1983).
- Nemo for Respondents (in Civil Petition No.754 of 1983).
- Date of hearing: 23rd May. 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
Civil Petition No.753 of 1983 MUNSHI KHAN and others‑‑Petitioners versus NOOR‑‑Respondent (From the order dated 27‑2‑1983 of the Lahore High Court in Civil Revision No.47‑D of 1983). Civil Petition No.754 of 1983 MUNSHI KHAN and others‑‑Petitioners versus BASHIR AHMAD and others‑‑Respondents (From the judgment dated 27‑2‑1983 of the Lahore High Court in R.S.A. No.2 of 1983). Civil Petitions Nos. 747, 753 and 754 of 1983, decided on 23rd May, 1988. Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ ‑‑‑Art. 203‑D(3)(b)‑‑Punjab Pre‑emption Act (I of 1913), Ss.15 & 30‑‑Pre‑emption suit‑‑No decree had been passed in favour of pre emptors till 31‑7‑1986 when the judgment of Shariat Appellate Bench of Supreme Court reported as Government of N.‑W.F.P. v. Malik Said Kamal Shah P L D 1986 S C 360 was to take effect‑‑Requirement of 'Talabs' as in Islam was not fulfilled‑‑No decree, held. could now be passed in favour of such pre‑emptors."' Sarda r Ali v . Muhammad Ali P L D 1988 S C 287 fol. .
Judgment & Decree
versus BASHIR AHMAD and others‑‑Respondents (From the judgment dated 27‑2‑1983 of the Lahore High Court in R.S.A. No.2 of 1983). Civil Petitions Nos. 747, 753 and 754 of 1983, decided on 23rd May, 1988. Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ ‑‑‑Art. 203‑D(3)(b)‑‑Punjab Pre‑emption Act (I of 1913), Ss.15 & 30‑‑Pre‑emption suit‑‑No decree had been passed in favour of pre emptors till 31‑7‑1986 when the judgment of Shariat Appellate Bench of Supreme Court reported as Government of N.‑W.F.P. v. Malik Said Kamal Shah P L D 1986 S C 360 was to take effect‑‑Requirement of 'Talabs' as in Islam was not fulfilled‑‑No decree, held. could now be passed in favour of such pre‑emptors."' Sarda r Ali v . Muhammad Ali P L D 1988 S C 287 fol. Hafiz Muhammad Yousaf, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab for Petitioners (in Civil Petition No.747 of 1983). M. M. Saeed Beg, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Inayat Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners (in Civil Petition No.754 of 1983). Nemo for Respondents (in Civil Petition No.754 of 1983). Date of hearing: 23rd May. 1988. . ORDER SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑These are three petitions for special leave to appeal arising out of pre‑emption suits. The petitioners are the pre‑emptors. It is admitted that so far no decree has been passed in their favour. It is not claimed that the requirement cf 'Talabs' as to Islam was fulfilled in these cases. In C.P.S.L.A. No.747 of 1983, learned counsel for the petitioners had not even heard of the expression 'Talab'. That being so, no decree can now be passed in their favour in view of the judgment of this Court in Sardar Ali v. Muhammad Ali (C .A. No.208 of 1980, decided on 2‑5‑1988: P L D 1988 S C 287). These petitions are accordingly dismissed. M.B.A./S‑149/S Petitions dismissed.