IJAZ AHMED vs NOOR UL AMEEN S — 2022 SCMR 1522 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.

IJAZ AHMED VS NOOR UL AMEEN S. 115---Revisional jurisdiction of the High Court---Scope---While exercising the revisional jurisdiction under section 115, C.P.C., the powers of the court are limited---Revisional court has to analyze the allegations of jurisdictional error such as exercise of jurisdiction not vested in the court below or a jurisdiction vested in it by law which it failed to exercise and/or the court has acted in exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity or committed some error of procedure in the course of the trial which is material in that it may have affected the ultimate decision. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1522 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IJAZ AHMED VS NOOR UL AMEEN Ss. 6(1)(c) & 13(3)---Suit for pre-emption---Shafi Jar---Failure to fulfill the legal requirements of Talb-i-Muwathibat and Talb-i-Ishhad---Petitioner/pre-emptor deposed that the pre-empted land was adjacent to his land with common source of irrigation but during cross-examination he stated that there was no official canal/irrigation rather the lands were irrigated from a river---Pre-emptor's witness also showed ignorance to khasra numbers of passage and source of common irrigation; he further admitted that there was no Warabandi and neither the pre-emptor was co-sharer in the Khata, nor there was any sanctioned khal---Patwari Consolidation had also deposed that there was no joint khata between the parties and, there was no passage or common source of irrigation nor any sanctioned water---Pre-emptor in his evidence deposed that he made Talb-i-Muwathibat on 27-08-2009 but in his cross-examination he admitted that in the last week of August 2009 he was in a different city---Pre-emptor's witness in his cross-examination stated that at the time of reducing the notice of Talb-i-Ishhad, no person was present except the pre-emptor but to make some improvement, voluntarily stated that another witness was also present---Pre-emptor's witness in his examination-in-chief stated that notice of Talb-i-Ishhad through registered post could not be delivered to the vendee as there was no person by the name of the pre-emptor and he returned the notice of Talb-i-Ishhad---Attesting witnesses of the notice of Talb-i-Ishhad did not depose to have the knowledge of contents of the notice of Talb-i-Ishhad---All the courts below had concurrently reached to the correct conclusion that the pre-emptor had miserably failed to fulfill the legal requirements of Talb-i-Muwathibat and Talb-i-Ishhad in accordance with the law---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and leave was refused. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1522 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IJAZ AHMED VS NOOR UL AMEEN S. 115---Revisional jurisdiction of the High Court---Scope---Provisions of section 115, C.P.C. under which a High Court exercises its revisional jurisdiction, confer an exceptional and necessary power intended to secure effective exercise of its superintendence and visitorial powers of correction unhindered by technicalities. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1522 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case IJAZ AHMED VS NOOR UL AMEEN S. 13(3)--- Talb-i-Ishhad, notice of--- Such notice must be served on the vendor through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due. Head NotesCase Description

IJAZ AHMED vs NOOR UL AMEEN S — 2022 SCMR 1522 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 SCMR