1989 PLP 160 (MLD)
BASHIR AHMAD and another‑‑Petitioners Versus Hafiz MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1989 PLP 160 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Amjad Khan, J |
| Parties | BASHIR AHMAD and another‑‑Petitioners Versus Hafiz MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Punjab Pre‑emption Act (I of 1913)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 160 (MLD)?
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 160 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Amjad Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 160 (MLD) (BASHIR AHMAD and another‑‑Petitioners Versus Hafiz MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Abdul Rehman for Petitioners.
- Riaz Ahmad Kasuri for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 30th January, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑Ss. 4 & 15‑‑Pre‑emption suit‑‑Respondent's suit was decreed on 17‑11‑1987 on the ground of being a co‑sharer in Khewat‑‑Held, no decree could be passed after 31‑7‑1986 in cases wherein prior thereto a decree had not been passed at any stage‑‑Decree of lower Court was set aside and suit of plaintiff having become infructuous in view of the law laid down by Supreme Court PLD 1988 SC 2887. OLD 1986 SC 360 and Sardar Ali and others PLD 1988 SC 287 rel. Muhammad Shoaib and others v. Member (Revenue) and others PLD 1988 SC 355 ref.
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Shoaib and others v. Member (Revenue) and others PLD 1988 SC 355 ref. Ch. Abdul Rehman for Petitioners. Riaz Ahmad Kasuri for Respondent. Date of hearing: 30th January, 1989. Suit instituted by the respondent on 2‑1‑1980 to pre‑empt a sale of agricultural land on the grounds of his collateral relationship with the vendors and also being a co‑sharer therein, was decreed for the first time on 17‑11‑1987 by the trial Court after protracted proceedings.
2. Appeal there against brought by the vendees came up for hearing before the learned District Judge who held that the plaintiff is a co‑sharer in the Khewat of the suit land and is, hence, possessed of a superior right of pre‑emption on that count. His claim on the plea of collateral relationship was, however, negatived on the authority of the cases of Malik Said Kamal Shah, reported as PLD 1986 SC 360 and Sardar Ali and others PLD 1988 SC
287. Attention of the learned appellate Judge does not appear to have been drawn to Muhammad Shoaib and others v. Member (Revenue) and others PLD 1988 SC 355 nor even to the proposition (laid down in the cases cited by him) that no decree is open to be passed after 31‑7‑1986 in those cases wherein prior thereto a decree had not been i passed at any stage. Result is that the trial Court's decree dated 17‑11‑1987 was passed unlawfully and could not be sustained. The same is set aside upon accepting this revision petition and the suit of the respondent, having become infructuous in view of the law declared by the Supreme Court, is dismissed. Parties are, however, left to bear their own costs all along. M.Y.H./B-106/L Suit dismissed.