emption. One of them is Taza Gul and another v. Said Ghulam — 1968 PLD 329

Citation: 1968 PLD 329

Court: Lahore High Court

Year: 1969

Decision Date: 1969-07-25

Parties: ALLAH DITTA vs FATEH KHAN AND Other

Headnotes

learned Judges considered the question of pre- emption in regard A to the right or interest of a confirmed allottee in the land allotted under the Rehabilitation Resettlement Scheme framed by the former Punjab Province. It was held that the right and interest of such a person in the property allotted to him under the Rehabilitation Settlement Scheme is "immovable property" and its sale is covered by sections 4 and 6 of the Punjab Pre---emption Act (1 of 1913).

Judgment Text

Court Name: Lahore High Court Judge(s): Shamim Hussain Qadri Title: ALLAH DITTA vs FATEH KHAN AND Other Case No.: Regular Second Appeal No. 901 of 1966 Date of Judgment:1969-07-25 Reported As: PLD 1970 Lahore 168 Result: Appeal accepted JUDGMENT JUDGMENT This is an appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Judge, Gujrat, dated the 13th of September 1966, whereby he reversed the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court in favour of, the plaintiff-appellant on the 24th of September 1965. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that Fateh Khan and Fazal Elahi, sons of A.I of village Kotha, and Muhammad Khan, son of Taj Din of village Dhonchal purchased land measuring 61 kanals and one marla allotted to Mst. Karman of village Barnali in village Bbago, Tehsil Kharian District Gujrat, vide mutation No. 2258 sanctioned on the 30th of November 1963, The plaintiff filed a suit for possession by way of pre-emption against the vendees claiming that he being co-sharer in the Khata and Patti had a superior right of pre-emption and only a sum of Rs.11,500.00 was paid as price of the land instead of Rs.13,000.00 as claimed by the vendees. The suit was resisted by the vendees on the ground that the vendor was only an allottee of the land and as such, the sale of allottee rights was not pre---emptable. They also denied the superior right of the plaintiff and claimed that they purchased the land for Rs. 13,000.00 and this amount was paid to the vendor. 3.…

Read the full judgment on Al Wakeelo — Pakistan's AI-powered legal research platform.