Citation Name: 2023 MLD 1825 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NOOR DIN vs KANAY S

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

Citation Name: 2023 MLD 1825 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NOOR DIN VS KANAY S. 19---Suit for pre-emption---Talb-i-Muwathibat, fulfillment of---Scope---Petitioner/plaintiff contended that someone via cellular phone informed him about the pre-empted sale and he, all of sudden, expressed his right of pre-emption over the same---Validity---Petitioner did not appear in person in the witness-box and all the proceedings were conducted through his attorney---Thus, the petitioner did not come to the witness-box to prove his contention that two witnesses were present in the sitting on the eventful night while he, after having come to know about the impugned sale through telephonic conversation, fulfilled Talb-i-Muwathibat---Statements of informer and alleged witnesses were fully inconsistent with the stance of the petitioner regarding the performance of Talb-i-Muwathibat, thus the petitioner failed to prove the same through trustworthy and reliable evidence---No illegality or infirmity was found in the impugned judgments and decrees passed by both the Courts below---Revision petition was dismissed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 MLD 1825 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NOOR DIN VS KANAY S. 19---Suit for pre-emption---Talb-i-Ishhad, fulfilment of---Scope---Trial Court dismissed the suit of the petitioner/plaintiff, which judgment and decree was maintained by the Appellate Court---Validity---Petitioner examined the Registry Clerk, who furnished evidence of having issued the registered letters purportedly containing the notice; he did not mention that the Acknowledgment Due (A.D) Cards also accompanied the registered post---No evidence was produced to prove that the notice was delivered---Other factual evidence relating to writing of notice Talb-i-Ishhad, its signing/thumb-impression by the marginal witnesses and its delivery to the respondent were materially contradictory---No illegality or infirmity was found in the impugned judgments and decrees passed by both the Courts below---Revision petition was dismissed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 MLD 1825 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NOOR DIN VS KANAY Ss. 19 & 24---Suit for pre-emption---Partial pre-emption---Scope---Deficiency in deposit of one-third sale-price---Effect---Petitioner/ plaintiff instituted suit against one vendee only in respect of said vendee's alleged relevant Khasra number alone---Trial Court dismissed suit of petitioner/plaintiff, which judgment and decree were maintained by Appellate Court---Validity---Record revealed that the impugned sale-mutation, the land-in-dispute was not only sold out to two persons (i.e. the respondent/defendant and another), but the same (land) consisted of two Khasra numbers including the one disputed by the petitioner---Thus, the petitioner brought the suit for partial pre-emption against only one vendee (respondent/defendant) in respect of the share sold out in disputed Khasra number ---When the suit was filed, instead of sale-mutation, fard Jamabandi was attached with the plaint , which was in respect of one (disputed) Khasra number only---Trial Court while considering the fard Jamabandi directed the petitioner to deposit an amount ( as Zar-e-Shufa) which was one third of the price he himself had mentioned in the plaint---Said sale price, having been mentioned by the petitioner , was too less and even less than the amount appearing in the relevant Fard Jamabandi in respect of suit-property; and also mush less than the sale consideration mentioned in the relevant mutation---Appellate Court had taken notice of said fact whereas the petitioner himself did not come up to the Court for the said deficiency---Petitioner brought the suit against one vendee only, which was hit by partial pre-emption being one of the vendees in respect of one Khasra number---No illegality or infirmity was found in the impugned judgments and decrees passed by both the Courts below---Revision petition was dismissed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 MLD 1825 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NOOR DIN VS KANAY S. 19--- Suit for pre-emption---Pursuing case through Attorney---Scope and effect--- Trial Court dismissed the suit of the petitioner/plaintiff, which judgment and decree was maintained by the Appellate Court---Validity---Petitioner did not appear in person in the witness-box and all the proceedings, including preparation of alleged notice Talb-i-Ishhad, were conducted through his attorney---Therefore, his statement regarding performance of Talbs was based on hearsay knowledge---Revision petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2023 MLD 1825 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NOOR DIN vs KANAY S — 2023 MLD 1825 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 MLD