Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MAQBOOL AHMAD and others VS Respondent: FAZAL DIN
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Saad Saood Jan Title: MAQBOOL AHMAD and others vs FAZAL DIN Case No.: Civil Petition No, 988 of 1984 Date of Judgment:1988-05-30 Reported As: 1989 SCMR 73 Result: Petition dismissed
Judgment ORDER ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--This is vendees' petition in a pre-emption matter. The points pressed by their learned counsel are: (i), that the pre-emptor could not establish his superior right of pre-emption on the basis of collatoralship and that the pedigree table produced from the respondent-preemptor's side has been misread; and (ii), that the evidence of the petitioners had wrongly been closed. With the help of the learned counsel, we examined the pedigree table referred by him which is at p. 67 of the paper book. According to the learned counsel the names of the vendor and the pre- emptor do not appear in this pedigree table. Therefore, it was of no assistance to the respondent. ' Learned counsel has not correctly read the pedigree table in this behalf. Moreover, we after having read the statement of the pre-emptor as his own witness, are satisfied that the so-called omission was only technical. It was adequately supplied by the deposition of the respondent with regard to his relationship. Nothing was brought in his cross-examination so as to benefit the petitioners. The first argument, therefore, fails. With regard to the second argument, the learned counsel 'contended that the petitioners were not afforded enough opportunity to produce evidence. Therefore, the same could not be closed. He, however, admitted that several adjournments were granted to them for this purpose. That being so, we do not consider it a fit case for the grant of leave to appeal on this point. ' The next point half-heartedly argued by the learned counsel is that the petitioners' side had better qualification as prior pre-emptors being tenants is also without force, as necessary evidence was not placed before the trial Court. In this behalf, the learned counsel relied upon a deed which records the petitioners' possession but the same as admitted by him, as mortgagee and not as
---
## Page 2
tenant. Similarly, another point raised by the learned counsel regarding impleadment of another party is too technical for this stage, to be given any importance. The petition fails and accordingly is dismissed.