Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN VS Respondent: GHULAM SHABBIR
1988 S C M R 1216
1988 S C M R 1216
Present: Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqba1, JJ
MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN‑‑Petitioner
versus
GHULAM SHABBIR‑‑Respondent
Civil Petitions for Leave to Appeal Nos.1588 and 1589 of 1980, decided on 24th April, 1988.
(On appeal from the order, dated 25‑10‑1980 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in R.S.A. Nos.738 and 739 of 1980).
(a) Punjab Pre‑emption Act (I of 1913)‑‑
‑‑‑S.21‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑Leave to appeal, grant of‑‑Findings of fact‑‑Interference with suits for pre‑emption‑ Findings of fact by all Courts below against petitioner‑‑No justification made out for interference‑‑Leave to appeal refused.
(b) Punjab Pre‑emption Act (I of 1913)‑‑
‑‑‑S.21‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑Suits for pre‑emption‑‑Petitioner not succeeding in any Court‑ ‑Pre‑emption law having been changed on 30th July, 1986 on account of Supreme Court judgment in Government of N.‑W.F.P. v. Malik Said Kamal P L D 1986 S C 360 no decree could now be passed in favour of petitioner for the first time‑‑Petitions dismissed.
Government of N.‑W.F.P. through Secretary, Law Department v. Malik Said Kamal Shah P L D 1986 S C 360 ref.
M.A. Aziz, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by M.A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners (in both Petitions).
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 24th April, 1988.
ORDER
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought in these two petitions which have arisen out of failure of the petitioner (plaintiff) throughout in two suits for pre‑emption.
2. Findings of fact by all the learned‑ Courts below are against the petitioner. No justification has been made out for interference by this Court in this behalf. Not only this, the petitioner has not succeeded in any Court so far. The pre‑emption law having been changed on 30th July, 1986, on account of the Judgment of this Court in the case of Government of N.‑W.F.P. through Secretary, Law Department v. Malik Said Kamal Shah P L D 1986 S C 360, no decree can now be passed in favour of the petitioner for the first time. These petitions are, accordingly, dismissed.
M. I. /M‑441/S Petitions dismissed.