Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 430 of 1979, decided on 21st March, 1981.
(On petition against the order dated 12th May, 1979 passed by the Lahore High Court in R. S. A. No. 763 of 1978).
---- Para. 25 (3) (d) read with West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), S. 4 (26)-Pre-emption by tenant-Petitioners merely able to prove themselves to be lessees in respect of fruit off garden and cultivators of crops in land under garden-Martial Law Regulation 115 having adopted definition of tenant as given in West Pakistan Land Revenue Act and such Act making liability to pay rent main condition for becoming a tenant-No evidence led to show there having existed any liability to payment, hence, no proof existing to show petitioners having been tenants Not being tenants, petitioners, held, cannot take advantage of provisions of Regulation [para. 25 (3) (d)] giving right of pre-emption to a tenant. -[Pre-emption].
Ch. Rafiq Ahmad Sabir, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
S. Inyat Hussain, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent.
Date of hearing : 21st March, 1981 (Lab.).
Abaad Ali and another purchased land. Mutation in respect of it was entered at No. 274 on 28th June, 1973. The sale consideration was a sum of Rs. 9,500. Muhammad Din, respondent, pre-empted the sale and his suit was decreed. An appeal was filed against this in which the sole question for determination was as to which one of it had the superior right to purchase that land. This appeal was dismis sed. This led to a second appeal before the High Court where the question of limitation was not raised. Muhammad Din's case is that he is a tenant and is, therefore, entitled to pre-empt the sale under the provisions of Martial Law Regulation No. 115. A learned Single Judge of the High Court came to the conclusion that the present petitioners were able to prove by oral evidence only that they were lessees in respect to the fruit of the garden and had also been cultivating crops in the land under the garden. Under Martial Law Regulation 115 the definition of the term tenant' appearing in the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act has been adopted. This is an admitted position. The liability to pay rent is the main condition for becoming a tenant. No evidence was led in the present case to show that there was any liability to pay the rent. There was therefore, no proof that the petitioners were the tenants. Not being tenants as visualized by the Martial Law Regulation No. 115 they cannot 61 take advantage of its provisions which give the right of pre-emption to a tenant. The stand of the petitioners is not borne out by the revenue re cord. They, however, want that the oral testimony of D. W. 1 and D. W. 2 should be accepted as enough for disproving the presumption attached to the revenue record. We cannot do that. The testimony of these two witnesses referred to above is not, in any way, enough for undoing the presumption attached to the revenue record. No other point is raised. This petition is, therefore, dismissed and leave to appeal is refused.
Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer