1989 PLP 398 (SCMR)
ALI BP.KHSH — Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 398 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Usman Ah Shah, JJ |
| Parties | ALI BP.KHSH — Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | 'Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 398 (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 1989 PLP 398 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Usman Ah Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 398 (SCMR) (ALI BP.KHSH — Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Fateh Ali Cheema, Advocate Supreme Court and K.E. Bhatti, Advoc~-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 16th October, 1988.
- Fateh Ali Cheema, Advocate Supreme Court and K.E. Bhatti, Advoc~‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 22nd August, 1987 in Writ Petition No. 3683 of 1987).
S. 15--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)--Pre-emption--Decree had not only been passed in favour of pre-emptor prior to 31-7-1986 but also that had become a past and closed transaction by delivery of possession in execution of such decree--Petitioner, held, would not be entitled to any benefit of judgment reported as Sardar Ali v. Muhammad Ali P L D 1988 SC 287. Government of N.-W.F.P. v. Malik Said Kamal P L D 1980 SC 3611 and Sardar Ali v. Muhammad Ali and others P L D 1988 SC 287 ref.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought by a vendee in a pre‑emption suit against dismissal of his writ petition lay the high Court whereby he had sought the restoration of possession of the suit land, which had earlier been delivered to the respondents' side in execution of a pre‑emption decree passed before 31st of July, 1986. Learned counsel urged' that the judgment of this Court in the case of Government of N.W.F.P. v. Malik Said Kanal (PLD 1980 SC: 3(x(1) gave no benefit to the petitioner notwithstanding the fact that he was one of those person who had originally initiated the proceedings in the Federal Shariat Court. This aspect of the matter has been considered elaborately in the recent judgment of this Court in Sardar All v. Muhammad Ali and others (PLD 198h SC 287) whereunder the petitioner would not be entitled to any benefit; as the decree had not only been passed in favour of the respondent prior to 31‑7‑1986 but also it had become a past and closed transaction by delivery of possession in execution of the decree. The learned counsel stated that he had frankly told the petitioner at the time of moving the Federal Shariat Court that he himself would not be benefited but he would become instrumental in the process of Islamisation. That being so, the petitioner should have felt satisfied and there was no reason to file this petition. It has no force and leave to appeal accordingly is refused. M.A.K./A‑367/8 Leave refused.