FARID ULLAH KHAN vs IRFAN ULLAH KHAN S — 2022 SCMR 1231 SUPREME-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

FARID ULLAH KHAN VS IRFAN ULLAH KHAN S. 13(2)---Suit for possession through pre-emption---Talb-i-Muwathibat and Talb-i-Ishhaad---When the first and primary Talb, that is, Talb-i-Muwathibat, is found to have not been proved, the Court need not examine the evidence on the making of the second Talb, that is, Talb-i-Ishhad, as where Talb-i-Muwathibat is not proved to have been made then the performance of Talb-i-Ishhad and all other requirements to successfully enforce the right of pre-emption cannot withstand---Foundation of the right of pre-emption rests on the making of Talb-i-Muwathibat; if it is not made in accordance with the law, the entire superstructure collapses. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1231 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case FARID ULLAH KHAN VS IRFAN ULLAH KHAN S. 13(2)--- Suit for possession through pre-emption--- Talb-i-Muwathibat---Proof---Circumstances contrary to version of Talb-i-Muwathibat---Assertion of a pre-emptor as to having come to know of the sale of the land on a particular date and making of Talb-i-Muwathibat on that date, being his personal and private act, cannot ordinarily be contradicted by the vendee through direct evidence; he can rebut such assertion, mostly by circumstantial evidence---Where two witnesses come up with an oral version of obtaining and conveying the first information of the sale, which are their personal and private acts, the authenticity of it can be examined only by testing the chain of the source of passing on and obtaining such information, as well as by establishing the circumstances that are inconsistent with their such version. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1231 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case FARID ULLAH KHAN VS IRFAN ULLAH KHAN Statement of a witness, reliance upon---Such statement must be consistent with the circumstances of the case before the same is believed and relied upon, as a man can lie but circumstances not. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1231 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case FARID ULLAH KHAN VS IRFAN ULLAH KHAN S. 13(2)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 71---Suit for possession through pre-emption--- Talb-i-Muwathibat--- Proof---Evidence of witness of Talb-i-Muwathibat must be direct---Person who conveys the information of the fact of sale must be a person who has seen the fact of sale and it is he who can then pass on the said fact to another person(s)---Thus, the chain of the source of information, as to the fact of sale, from the very first person, who has the direct knowledge thereof and passes on the same to the person who lastly informs the pre-emptor, must be complete---Only the complete chain of the source of information of the sale can establish the essential elements of Talb-i-Muwathibat, which are: (i) the time, date and place when the pre-emptor obtained the first information of the sale, and; (ii) the immediate declaration of his intention by the pre-emptor to exercise his right of pre-emption, then and there, on obtaining such information---Where the entire case as to making of Talb-i-Muwathibat is built on the hearsay evidence of a witness, it would raise doubts on the veracity and truthfulness of the witnesses produced by pre-emptor. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1231 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case FARID ULLAH KHAN VS IRFAN ULLAH KHAN art. 185---appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court---Scope---Concurrent findings of fact---Supreme Court does not normally go behind a concurrent finding of fact, if that finding is not vitiated by any error in point of law, but this rule is not a cast-iron one, and there may be cases of such an unusual nature as will constrain the Court to depart from it in order to prevent a miscarriage of justice---Supreme Court, therefore, does not hesitate to review the evidence in spite of a concurrent finding of the courts below, if it be shown with absolute clearness that some substantial error is apparent in the manner in which the courts below have dealt with the facts, or if the finding is on the face of it against the evidence or so patently improbable or perverse that to accept it would amount to perpetuating a grave miscarriage of justice. Head NotesCase Description

FARID ULLAH KHAN vs IRFAN ULLAH KHAN S — 2022 SCMR 1231 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 SCMR