1969 PLP 67 (SCMR)
MEHR ALLAH DITTA AND ANOTHER Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD ALI AND ANOTHER‑Respondents
| Citation | 1969 PLP 67 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MEHR ALLAH DITTA AND ANOTHER Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD ALI AND ANOTHER‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1969 PLP 67 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1969 PLP 67 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1969 PLP 67 (SCMR) (MEHR ALLAH DITTA AND ANOTHER Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD ALI AND ANOTHER‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Shabir Ahmad, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (J. A. Pervez, Advocate with him) instructed by Gulzar Hasan, Attorney for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing : 9th October 1968.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and decree of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 30th October 1967, in R. S. A. No. 105 of 1961). Pre‑emption‑ Question: whether if a person, having right of pre‑emption, associates with him another who has no such right, a decree in favour of former can be passed‑Special Leave to Appeal granted by Supreme Court to consider question.
Judgment & Decree
ABDUS SATTAR, J.‑This petition for leave to appeal arises out of a suit for possession on the basis of pre‑emption brought by three persons, namely, Muhammad Ali, Chiragh Din and Imam Din. The learned Civil Judge, Lahore, found that Imam Din had no right of pre‑emption. The suit was dismissed on various grounds including that Muhammad Ali and Chiragh Din had associated with them a stranger who had no right of pre‑emption. On appeal the Additional District Judge found that all the plaintiffs were entitled to claim pre‑emption. In the second appeal a learned Single Judge of the High Court of West Pakistan found that Imam Din had no right of pre‑emption. He therefore struck out the names of the legal representatives of Imam Din who had died in the meantime under Order I, rule 10, C. P. C. and maintained the decree for pre‑emption in respect of the entire property in favour of Muhammad Ali and Chiragh Din. It is contended that since Imam Din or his heirs never gave up their claim the learned Judge was not justified in striking; out the names of the latter and maintaining the decree in favour of the other two plaintiffs. The question whether if a person having a right of pre‑emption associates with him another who has no such right a decree in favour of the former can be passed is of general importance and there is no decision of this Court ors this point. Leave is granted Security is the sum of Rs. 1,
000. Stay already granted will continue. 1f however the respondents have already deposited the balance of the consideration money then the plaintiffs will furnish security within one month from today to the satisfaction of the trial Court for mesne profits to which the respondents may be entitled in case of dismissal of the appeal. In default the stay order shall stand vacated. Leave granted.