1981 PLP 398 (CLC)
Mst. SAKINA BEGUM‑Defendant/Appellant Versus Mst. SURAT BIBI‑Respondent
| Citation | 1981 PLP 398 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Lone, J |
| Parties | Mst. SAKINA BEGUM‑Defendant/Appellant Versus Mst. SURAT BIBI‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1981 PLP 398 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1981 PLP 398 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Lone, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1981 PLP 398 (CLC) (Mst. SAKINA BEGUM‑Defendant/Appellant Versus Mst. SURAT BIBI‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- M. Riaz Anwar for Appellant.
- M. Pervaiz Akhtar for Respondents.
- Date of hearing : 22nd March, 1980.
Headnotes / Summary
(a) Punjab Pre‑emption Act (I of 1913)‑ ‑‑ S. 22‑Deposit of security‑Legislature's object in insisting upon deposit or furnishing of security by a pre‑emptor‑To safeguard vendee against frivolous proceedings on pact of prospective pre emptors. (b) Punjab Pre‑emption Act (I of 1913)‑ ‑‑ S. 22(5) (a)‑Dismissal of appeal for withdrawal of one‑fifth amount‑Appellate Court may direct appellant to make deposit at any time before final determination of appeal‑Pre‑emptor‑appellant who on dismissal of his suit withdraws one‑fifth of pre‑emption money would be bound to deposit same in Court only if ordered by Appellate Court but need not volunteer such payment‑Pre‑emptor's appeal cannot be dismissed if no such order made‑Appellant having deposited one‑fifth in trial Court withdrawing same at appellate stage without permission of Court‑Held, would not be immune from action under subsection (5) (a)‑[Paras Ram v. Dulpat Rai A I R 1920 Lab. 46 and Prem Singh v. Lakha Singh and others A I R 1929 Lab. 387 dissented from].‑[Appeal (civil)]. Sanwal Das v. Jaigo Mal and others A 1 R 1924 Lab. 68 fol. Paras Ram v. Dalpat Rai A I R 1920 Lab. 46 and Prem Singh v. Lakha Singh and others A I R 1929 Lab. 387 dissented from. Mst. Bibi Aisha v. Shadi Khan A I R 1935 Pesh. 143 ; Khair Din v. Hashmat and others 1974 Law Notes 735 ; Abdul Ghafoor and another v. Mst. Igbal Begum and another 'P L D 1975 Lab. 524 and Ismail and another v. Muhammad Aslam and 2 others P L D 1980 Lab. 104 ref. (c) Precedents ‑‑‑ Dicta of a Judge‑Held, can lay down authority only for points mooted and discussed in his judgment. (d) Precedents‑ ‑ Pre‑Partition decisions of Lahore High Court‑Not binding on present High Court though entitled to greatest respect. Muhammad Ahsan Ullah Khan and others v. Muhammad Sami Ullah Khan and others P L D 1964 Lab. 101 ref.
Judgment & Decree
Sanwal Das v. Jaigo Mal and others A 1 R 1924 Lab. 68 fol. Paras Ram v. Dalpat Rai A I R 1920 Lab. 46 and Prem Singh v. Lakha Singh and others A I R 1929 Lab. 387 dissented from. Mst. Bibi Aisha v. Shadi Khan A I R 1935 Pesh. 143 ; Khair Din v. Hashmat and others 1974 Law Notes 735 ; Abdul Ghafoor and another v. Mst. Igbal Begum and another 'P L D 1975 Lab. 524 and Ismail and another v. Muhammad Aslam and 2 others P L D 1980 Lab. 104 ref. (c) Precedents ‑‑‑ Dicta of a Judge‑Held, can lay down authority only for points mooted and discussed in his judgment. (d) Precedents‑ ‑ Pre‑Partition decisions of Lahore High Court‑Not binding on present High Court though entitled to greatest respect. Muhammad Ahsan Ullah Khan and others v. Muhammad Sami Ullah Khan and others P L D 1964 Lab. 101 ref. M. Riaz Anwar for Appellant. M. Pervaiz Akhtar for Respondents. Date of hearing : 22nd March, 1980.