Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
1988 S C M R 1581
1988 S C M R 1581
Present: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jan, JJ
MIR‑‑Petitioner
versus
KHAN and others‑‑ Respondents
Civil Petition No.492 of 1984, decided on 30th May, 1986.
(Against the Judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, dated 18‑3‑1984 in W.P.No.5503 of 1978).
Punjab Pre‑emption Act (I of 1913)‑‑
‑‑‑S.21‑‑Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XX, R.14(1)‑ Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑Pre‑emption decree passed by Collector in favour of pre‑emptor‑‑Pre‑emptor approached High Court with Constitutional petition with regard to the grant of time for making the deposit which was accepted with direction to the pre‑emptor to approach the Collector‑ ‑Pre‑emptor approached the Collector who accepted the amount and proceedings ended in accordance with the intention underlying O.XX, R.14(1), C.P.C.‑‑Respondents, however, through a miscellaneous application in the already dispose of writ petition, succeeded in non‑suiting the pre‑emptor‑‑ Contention of petitioner that the course adopted by the respondents and acceptance of their application /plea, by High Court was against law‑‑Question raised being that of first impression leave to appeal was granted.
Malik Talab Hussain Awan, Advocate Supreme Court and Sh.Salahuddin, Advocate‑ on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 30th May, 1988.
JUDGMENT
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Leave to appeal has been sought by a pre‑emptor against order dated 18‑3‑1984 of the Lahore High Court, whereby a Civil Miscellaneous Application (No:328 of 1984) filed by the respondents in Writ Petition No.5503 of 1978, which already stood disposed of, ;,vas allowed and the petitioner was non‑suited.
The Collector had passed a decree in favour of the petitioner/ pre‑emptor He approached the High Court in its writ jurisdiction through W.P.5503 of 197$ with regard to the grant of time for making the deposit. The High Court allowed the writ petition with direction to approach the Collector. The petitioner approached the Collector accordingly who accepted the amount and the proceedings ended in accordance with the intention underlying Order XX rule 14(1) clause (b) C.P.C.
Notwithstanding the same, the respondents' side filed afore mentioned miscellaneous application in the writ petition, which had been disposed of and they succeeded in non‑suiting the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has, inter alia, contended that the course adopted by the respondents and the acceptance of their application/ pleas by the High Court is against law.
The questions raised in the petition require examination. Besides, this is a case of first impression. Leave to appeal accordingly is granted.
Security Rs.5,000.
The appeal shall be prepared on the present record with direction to the parties concerned to file all necessary additional documents within two months.
M.B.A. /M‑499/S. Leave granted.