1988 PLP 1394 (SCMR)
SAIFUL KHAN and 4 others — Petitioners Versus FIYAZ ALI KHAN — Respondent
| Citation | 1988 PLP 1394 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | SAIFUL KHAN and 4 others — Petitioners Versus FIYAZ ALI KHAN — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 1394 (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 1394 (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: 1988 PLP 1394 (SCMR) (SAIFUL KHAN and 4 others — Petitioners Versus FIYAZ ALI KHAN — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Khurshid Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Rana Muhammad Sarwar, Advocate Supreme Court and Rana M.A.Qadri, Advocate-on--Record for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 22nd May, 1988
- Ch. Khurshid Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Rana Muhammad Sarwar, Advocate Supreme Court and Rana M.A.Qadri, Advocate‑on‑‑Record for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 3-4-1983 of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, passed in Regular Second Appeal No. 644 of 1967). -- -S.21--Pre-emption suit--Question as to whether or not, plaintiff could have been allowed amendment of his plaint in such a manner so as to avoid bar of partial pre-emption having been decided by the Supreme Court judgments viz. Wazir Muhammad v. Abdul Aziz 1982 SCMR 189 and Naeem-ur-Rehman and others v. Muhammad Anwar 1986 S C M R 1488, against petitioners, petition was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought by the vendees in a pre‑emption matter against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, whereby respondent /pre‑emptor's Regular Second Appeal was allowed.
2. The question involved is whether or not, in the circumstances of this case, the respondent/ plaintiff could have been allowed amendment of his plaint in such a manner so as to avoid the bar of partial pre‑emption. The learned counsel frankly stated that two judgments of this Court go against him. They are Wazir Muhammad v. Abdul Aziz 1962 S C M It 189 and Naeem‑ur‑Rehman and others v. Muhammad Anwar and others 1986 S C M R 1488. That being so, leave to appeal is refused and the petition is dismissed. M.B.A./S‑154/S Petition dismissed.