1988 PLP 1567 (SCMR)
BAQAR and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD QASIM KHAN — Respondent
| Citation | 1988 PLP 1567 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | BAQAR and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD QASIM KHAN — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 1567 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP 1567 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court 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: 1988 PLP 1567 (SCMR) (BAQAR and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD QASIM KHAN — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- S. Inayat Hussain, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 1st June, 1988.
- S. Inayat Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- The learned counsel for petitioners while admitting that the petitioners have failed throughout with regard to the alleged partial pre‑emption by the respondent, has however, contended that the respondent's plaint was defective in so far as the description of the suit property is concerned. Therefore, the suit should have been dismissed on ground of partial pre‑emption.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan, dated 6-4-1985 in R.S.A. No.69 of 1985).
Ss.15 & 21--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)--Leave to appeal, grant of--Defective description of suit property--Clerical/ technical omission in plaint--Effect of--Petitioners-vendees alleging partial pre-emption by respondent--Dismissal of Second Appeal challenged--Plea that respondent-pre-emptor's plaint was defective in so far as description of suit property was concerned, repelled Being a clerical/ technical omission it could not be made use of by trendees so as to non-suit the respondent on the ground of partial pre emption--Leave to appeal refused. Naeem-ur-Rehman v. Mohamad Anwar 1986 S C M R 1488 rel.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought by the vendees' side in a pre‑emption matter against the dismissal of their Regular Second Appeal by the High Court. The learned counsel for petitioners while admitting that the petitioners have failed throughout with regard to the alleged partial pre‑emption by the respondent, has however, contended that the respondent's plaint was defective in so far as the description of the suit property is concerned. Therefore, the suit should have been dismissed on ground of partial pre‑emption. After hearing the learned counsel we are satisfied that it was a clerical/ technical omission which could not be made use of by the vendees so as to non‑suit the respondent on the ground of partial pre‑emption. The judgment of this Court in the case of Naeem‑ur‑Rehman v. Mohammad Anwar 1986 S C M R 1488 as admitted by the learned counsel, goes against the petitioners' case. Leave to appeal accordingly is refused. M.I./B‑61/S Petition dismissed.