Find a Lawyer

(On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 23rd April, 1978 in R. S. A. No. 48 of 1977/BWP).

‑‑ Art. 185(3)‑Punjab Pre‑emption Act (I of 1913), Ss. 3(5) & 21 On face there appearing to be two transactions ; one of exchange and other of sale ; but result of mutation being that while disputed land remained with vendee amount had gone in exchange to vendor‑Leave to appeal granted to consider question whether such transaction would fall within definition of "sale".‑[Words and phrases].

Sh. Ghias Muhammad, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing : 24th January, 1984.

MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.

This petition for leave to appeal arises out of the Order dated 23rd April, 1971 of the Lahore High Court ; whereby a Regular Second Appeal arising out of a pre‑emption suit preferred by the petitioner‑pre‑emptor was, dismissed.

The point agitated in the High Court was that although the transaction in question in reality was of sale, the vendor and the vendee‑defendant gave it a false colour of exchange. As the lower two Courts below had rendered a finding that the petitioner had failed to establish the factum of sale, inter ference in revisional jurisdiction on question of finding of fact, was not considered justified.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has, amongst others, contended that the learned Courts below have failed to raise due inference from a vital material which remained available on record and was not attended to by the High Court. The same being that on the day the vendor and the vendee got a mutation of exchange sanctioned regarding the land in dispute with 3 Kanals 14 Marlas of the vendee's land, the vendor (on the same day) by a different mutation sold the so‑called exchanged land measuring 3 Kanals 14 Marlas to the vendee for Rs. 22,000. Thus, the net result was that although on face there appeared to be two transactions ; one of exchange and the other of sale ; but the net result of the two mutations was that : while the disputed land measuring 4 Kanals 9 Marlas remained with the vendee, the amount of Rs. 22,000 had gone in exchange to the vendor. This, it is argued by the learned counsel, would fall within "sale" as defined in law and the relevant precedents.

Questions raised by the learned counsel deserve consideration. Leave is accordingly granted to examine them. Security Rs. 2,500.

M. Z. M. Leave granted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.