| Case ID |
08821c43-82e7-4bf9-94d8-5545798c19d8 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Regular Second Appeal No. 180 of 1950 |
| Decision Date |
Mar 26, 1952 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The court determined that the original deposit made by the three plaintiffs was sufficient and that the withdrawal of the deposit by two plaintiffs, after they had compromised, did not justify the rejection of the plaint. The third plaintiff, Pir Bakhsh, was not responsible for the withdrawal of the funds by the other two. The court emphasized that the deposit must be made before the settlement of issues, and since this was not done, the suit could proceed despite the withdrawal. The appeal was accepted, and the case was remanded for trial without imposing any costs. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of Regular Second Appeal No. 180 of 1950 decided by the Lahore High Court, the issue revolved around the Pre-emption Act of 1913, specifically section 22 concerning deposit requirements in pre-emption suits. The case involved three plaintiffs who initially filed for pre-emption but later two of them withdrew their shares after reaching a compromise with the defendant. The court found that the necessary deposit had been made in compliance with the law, and the withdrawal by the two plaintiffs, who were no longer parties in the case, did not affect the remaining plaintiff's standing. This decision highlights the importance of understanding the legal framework surrounding pre-emption rights and the necessity for all parties to adhere to procedural requirements. The court's ruling reinforces that a suit can continue even if there are issues related to deposit deficiencies, provided that the initial requirements were met. This case serves as a crucial reference point for future pre-emption cases, emphasizing the procedural safeguards in place under the Pre-emption Act. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
MUHAMMAD KHURSHID ZAMAN,
M. R. KAYANI, JJ
|
| Lawyers |
Qazi Muhammad Ashraf,
Sheikh Akbar Ali,
Syed Muhammad Amin Indrabi
|
| Petitioners |
PIR BAKHSH
|
| Respondents |
PIR BAHAUDDIN
|
| Citations |
1952 SLD 158,
1952 PLD 376
|
| Other Citations |
Gobind v. Kishan Chand 52 P R 1891
|
| Laws Involved |
Pre-emption Act (I of 1913)
|
| Sections |
22(1),
22(4),
22(5)(a)
|