| Case ID |
217525d8-d135-4bee-9432-7a100bd0204f |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Revision No. 1918 of 2013 |
| Decision Date |
Jul 17, 2013 |
| Hearing Date |
Jun 16, 2021 |
| Decision |
In this case, the Lahore High Court dismissed the petition filed by the respondent/plaintiff Muhammad Boota seeking possession through pre-emption. The court held that the petitioner, Muhammad Boota, did not possess the superior right of pre-emption required at various stages, including the time of sale, filing of the suit, and at decree. Furthermore, the petitioner failed to prove the necessary Talb-i-Muwathibat in accordance with Section 13 of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991. The evidence presented by the petitioner was deemed hearsay and inadmissible, and the witnesses were not consistent or credible in establishing the pre-emption rights. Consequently, the court set aside the judgment and decree dated July 17, 2013, and upheld the earlier judgment dated July 6, 2012, thereby dismissing the suit for possession through pre-emption. |
| Summary |
In the landmark decision rendered by the Lahore High Court on June 16, 2021, under Civil Revision No. 1918 of 2013, the court scrutinized the petition filed by Muhammad Boota against Khalid Zia Ullah regarding a suit for possession through pre-emption under the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991, specifically Section 13. The case revolved around the alleged failure of the petitioner to establish superior pre-emption rights following the death of the original pre-emptor, Ghulam Rasul, during the pendency of the suit. The petitioner, represented by Mehmood Ahmad Bhatti, was unable to convincingly demonstrate the performance of Talb-i-Muwathibat, as required by law, with evidence marred by inconsistencies and hearsay, undermining the credibility of the pre-emption claim. Respondent Khalid Zia Ullah, represented by Mian Javed Iqbal Arian, successfully contested the petition by highlighting the petitioner’s inability to meet the stringent legal prerequisites for asserting pre-emption, including timely and legally compliant Talbs. The court meticulously evaluated the evidence, referencing multiple precedents such as Muhammad Ishaq v. Muhammad Sadiq and Mir Muhammad Khan v. Haider, affirming the necessity of robust proof in pre-emption cases. The judgment underscored the importance of procedural compliance and the burden of proof resting on the petitioner to establish entitlement to pre-emption rights unequivocally. Ultimately, the court set aside the appellant's decree of July 17, 2013, maintaining the trial court's decision of July 6, 2012, thus dismissing the petition for pre-emption and reinforcing the legal framework governing property disputes in Punjab. This decision serves as a critical reference for future cases involving pre-emption rights, emphasizing the pivotal role of evidence integrity and procedural adherence in judicial determinations. Legal practitioners and parties engaged in property litigation can draw valuable insights from this case, ensuring meticulous attention to legal formalities and evidentiary standards to uphold or contest pre-emption claims effectively. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Muhammad Akhtar,
Ghulam Rasul,
Khurshid Ahmad
|
| Judges |
SAFDAR SALEEM SHAHID, J
|
| Lawyers |
Mehmood Ahmad Bhatti for Petitioner,
Mian Javed Iqbal Arian for Respondent
|
| Petitioners |
MUHAMMAD BOOTA
|
| Respondents |
KHALID ZIA ULLAH
|
| Citations |
2022 SLD 3031,
2022 YLR 894
|
| Other Citations |
Muhammad Ishaq v. Muhammad Sadiq 2007 SCMR 1478,
Sardar Ali and others v. Muhammad Ali and others PLD 1988 SC 287,
Baldeo Misir v. Ramlangan Shukul AIR 9124 Allahabad 82,
Bilal Ahmad and another v. Abdul Hameed 2020 SCMR 445,
Muzaffar Hussain v. Mst. Bivi and 7 others PLD 2012 Lah. 12,
Mir Muhammad Khan and 2 others v. Haider and others PLD 2020 SC 233,
Muhammad Anwar v. Safeer Ahmed and 5 others 2017 SCMR 404,
Mst. Kaneez Begum v. Muhammad Asghar and others 2014 MLD 1179,
Mst. Rooh Afza v. Aurangzeb and others 2015 SCMR 92,
Mian Pir Muhammad and another v. Faqir Muhamamd through L.Rs and others PLD 2007 SC 302,
Faqir Muhammad and 8 others v. Abdul Momin and 2 others PLD 2002 SC 594,
Muhammad Nawaz alias Nawaza and others v. Member Judicial Board of Revenue and others 2014 SCMR 914,
Muhammad Bashir and others v. Abbas Ali Shah 2007 SCMR 1105,
Basharat Ali Khan v. Muhammad Akbar 2017 SCMR 309,
Allah Ditta through L.Rs and others v. Muhammad Anar 2013 SCMR 866,
Ghulam Hussain v. Muhammad Rasheed and 6 others 2018 MLD 117,
Sultan v. Noor Asghar 2020 SCMR 682
|
| Laws Involved |
Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991
|
| Sections |
13
|