| Case ID |
039e3552-b5dc-402b-9802-9f82d4feb092 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Appeal No. 353 of 1985 |
| Decision Date |
Apr 06, 1991 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Supreme Court of Pakistan accepted the appeal in Civil Appeal No. 353 of 1985 on April 6, 1991. The court determined that the suit for pre-emption was not valid under the Punjab Pre-emption Act of 1913 because the custom of pre-emption did not exist in the new Abadi area at the time the act was enforced. Consequently, the decrees of the lower courts were overturned, and the appeal was allowed, with each party bearing their own legal costs. |
| Summary |
In Civil Appeal No. 353 of 1985, adjudicated by the Supreme Court of Pakistan on April 6, 1991, the court addressed a pivotal issue concerning the applicability of the Punjab Pre-emption Act of 1913 in newly developed residential areas, known as Abadis, established post-independence. The case revolved around the sale of a portion of House No.1269/14 in Multan City, where the appellant acquired the property through a registered sale-deed dated February 17, 1973. Subsequently, on February 12, 1974, the respondent filed a suit for possession based on the right of pre-emption, asserting ownership of the contiguous property. The core legal question was whether the custom of pre-emption was prevalent in the new Abadi at the time the Punjab Pre-emption Act was enforced in 1913.
The appellant contested the suit, arguing that there was no established custom of pre-emption in the newly developed area, thereby questioning the applicability of Section 7 of the Punjab Pre-emption Act. The respondent, in their defense, acknowledged that the area was agricultural land until the creation of Pakistan, after which it gradually transformed into a residential zone. This admission was crucial in determining that the custom of pre-emption did not exist in the area at the time the act was enacted, rendering the suit for pre-emption invalid under the statutory provisions.
The Supreme Court, referencing precedent cases such as Mst. Maqsooda Begum v. Maulvi Abdul Haq and others (PLD 1968 Lahore 897) and Fazal Karim v. Muhammad Afzal and others (1982 SCMR 997), reinforced the argument that the lack of an established custom of pre-emption in the new Abadi nullified the respondent's claim. The court emphasized the legislative intent behind the Punjab Pre-emption Act, which required an existing custom of pre-emption at the time of its enforcement to validate any pre-emption suit.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court set aside the lower courts' judgments, dismissed the respondent's suit, and allowed the appellant's appeal. This decision underscores the importance of established customary practices in the application of statutory laws, particularly in the context of property rights and urban development. The ruling has significant implications for future property disputes in Pakistan, especially in urban areas undergoing rapid development, highlighting the necessity for clear legal frameworks that consider both statutory provisions and prevailing customs. Legal practitioners and property developers must navigate these complexities to ensure the validity of pre-emption claims, aligning their strategies with both legislative requirements and customary practices to mitigate legal challenges. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
ABDUL SHAKURUL SALAM,
RUSTAM S. SIDHWA
|
| Lawyers |
Not available
|
| Petitioners |
Not available
|
| Respondents |
Nazir Ahmed,
Fateh Muhammad
|
| Citations |
1994 SLD 609,
1994 SCMR 529
|
| Other Citations |
Mst. Maqsooda Begum v. Maulvi Abdul Haq and others PLD 1968 Lahore 897,
Fazal Karim v. Muhammad Afzal and others 1982 SCMR 997
|
| Laws Involved |
Punjab Pre-emption Act (I of 1913),
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)
|
| Sections |
S. 7,
Art. 185(3)
|