1988 PLP 1952 (SCMR)
DURAB KHAN — Petitioner Versus ALLAH WASAYA — Respondent
| Citation | 1988 PLP 1952 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Land Reforms Regulation, 1972 M.L.R. 115 |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Javid Iqbal and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | DURAB KHAN — Petitioner Versus ALLAH WASAYA — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 1952 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP 1952 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Land Reforms Regulation, 1972 M.L.R. 115 bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Javid Iqbal and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP 1952 (SCMR) (DURAB KHAN — Petitioner Versus ALLAH WASAYA — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- C.A. Rahman, Advocate Supreme Court, instructed by Hamid Aslam Qureshi, Advocate- on-Record for Petitioner (in C.P. 788/81).
- Nemo for Respondents (in C.P. 788/81).
- Talib H.Rizvi, Advocate Supreme Court, instructed by S.Ali Imam Naqvi, Advocate- on-Record for Petitioner (in C.P. 857 /81).
- Nemo for Respondents (in C.P. 857/81).
- Ghulam Muhammad Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner (in C.P. 922/81).
- Nemo for Respondents (in C.P..922/82).
- Muhammad Naazar, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner (in C.P. 886/82).
- Nemo for Respondent (in C.P. 886/82).
- Date of hearing: 7th May, 1988.
- C.A. Rahman, Advocate Supreme Court, instructed by Hamid Aslam Qureshi, Advocate‑ on‑Record for Petitioner (in C.P. 788/81).
- Talib H.Rizvi, Advocate Supreme Court, instructed by S.Ali Imam Naqvi, Advocate‑ on‑Record for Petitioner (in C.P. 857 /81).
- Ghulam Muhammad Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner (in C.P. 922/81).
- Muhammad Naazar, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner (in C.P. 886/82).
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order dated 19-9-1982 of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan, passed in R.S.A. No.71 of 1982). Land Reforms Regulation, 1972 [M.L.R. 115]
Para. 25(4)--Pre-emption- suit by tenant--Pre-emptor tenant had not obtained any pre-emption decree on or before 31st July, 1986- Fresh decree could not be passed thereafter in view of decision of Supreme Court reported in P L D 1986 S C
360. Government N.-W.F.P. v. Malik Said Kamal Shah P L D 1986 S C 360 rel.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑All these petitions, although not connected inter se, involve the same point. Therefore, they are being disposed of together.
2. The petitions for leave to appeal have been filed by plaintiffs/ pre‑emptors in pre‑emption suits/ applications. As admitted by their learned counsel, no pre‑emption decree has so far been passed in favour of any one of them at any stage before any Court or any other authority (in case of tenants under M.L.R. 115). The Law/s under which the petitioners sought pre‑emption decrees in these cases, ceased to have effect on 31st of July, 1986 by virtue of the judgment of the Shariat Appellate Bench of this Court in the case of Government of N.‑W.F.P. v. Malik Said Kamal Shah P L D 1986 S C
360. No fresh decree can be passed in the circumstances of these cases now in favour of any of the petitioners on account of the said position of the law. That being so, Leave to appeal is refused in all these petitions and the same are, accordingly, dismissed. M.Y.H./D‑25/S Leave refused.