1994CLC 124 (PLP)
ALLAH WASAYA and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus YOUSUF and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1994CLC 124 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Munir A. Shaikh, J |
| Parties | ALLAH WASAYA and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus YOUSUF and others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Punjab Pre‑emption Act (IX of 1991)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994CLC 124 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Pre‑emption Act (IX of 1991)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994CLC 124 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Munir A. Shaikh, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994CLC 124 (PLP) (ALLAH WASAYA and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus YOUSUF and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Islam Ali Qureshi for Petitioners. Sardar Muhammad Rafiq Khan for Respondent No.l.
- Date of hearing: 2nd December, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 13‑‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115‑‑‑Suit for pre‑emption‑‑ Maintainability‑‑‑Revisional jurisdiction‑‑‑Exercise of‑‑‑Suit for pre‑emption filed by pre‑emptor on ground of being co‑sharer in Khata was concurrently dismissed by Courts below without trial on merits holding that no Talabs were made in the case‑‑‑Suit by a co‑sharer without making Talabs was maintainable and could be decreed even after 31‑7‑1986‑‑‑Courts below having failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in them to decide suit on merits, concurrent judgments and decrees of Courts below were declared illegal by High Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. Ahmad and others v. Abdul Aziz and others PLD 1989 SC 771 ref.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑S. 13‑‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115‑‑‑Suit for pre‑emption‑‑ Maintainability‑‑‑Revisional jurisdiction‑‑‑Exercise of‑‑‑Suit for pre‑emption filed by pre‑emptor on ground of being co‑sharer in Khata was concurrently dismissed by Courts below without trial on merits holding that no Talabs were made in the case‑‑‑Suit by a co‑sharer without making Talabs was maintainable and could be decreed even after 31‑7‑1986‑‑‑Courts below having failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in them to decide suit on merits, concurrent judgments and decrees of Courts below were declared illegal by High Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. Ahmad and others v. Abdul Aziz and others PLD 1989 SC 771 ref. Islam Ali Qureshi for Petitioners. Sardar Muhammad Rafiq Khan for Respondent No.l. Date of hearing: 2nd December, 1989. This suit of the petitioners for possession of land through pre‑emption on the ground that they were co‑sharers in the Khata was dismissed by the learned trial Court through judgment and decree dated 8‑10‑1988 without trial on merits on the ground that no Talabs were made. This was assailed in appeal before the learned lower appellate Court which has also been dismissed through judgment and decree dated 1‑12‑1988 on the same ground.
2. It has been argued that the view taken by the two Courts below is contrary to the rule laid down by the Supreme Court in Ahmad and others v. Abdul Aziz etc. (PLD 1989 SC 771) according to which the suit by a co‑sharer without making Talabs was maintainable and could be decreed even after 31‑7‑1986. The two Courts below in view of this law declared by the Supreme Court failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in them to decide the suit on merits. The impugned judgments and decrees of both the Courts below are not sustainable. This revision petition is accepted. The judgments and decrees of both the Courts below are set aside and the case is remanded to the learned trial Court for disposal of the suit on merits in accordance with law, There will be no order as to costs. H.B.T./A‑492/L Order accordingly.