ALLAH DITTA vs FATEH KHAN AND Other — 1962 PLD 42

Citation: 1962 PLD 42

Court: Lahore High Court

Year: 1969

Decision Date: 1969-07-25

Parties: ALLAH DITTA vs FATEH KHAN AND Other

Headnotes

their Lordships have observed as follows: "It is difficult, in the circumstance, to imagine how it can be said that the interest acquired by the allottee in the pro--perty is merely a personal interest which cannot be inheri--ted. In our view, having regard to the rights expressly con--feered upon him by the Scheme itself, an allottee, in whose favour an allotment has been confirmed, acquired a right which is in every sense of the term a `real property' in its true juristic concept an interest in land." PLD 1968 Lah.329) their Lordships held as under: "There is yet another aspect of the case.

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.