PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

MUHAMMAD SALEEM (deceased) vs HABIB-UR-REHMAN S — 2025 CLC 1427 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2025 CLC 1427 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2025
Reporter
CLC
Parties
MUHAMMAD SALEEM (deceased) vs HABIB-UR-REHMAN S
Subject matter
Civil
Provisions referred to
S. 13; S. 115---S; Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

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

Judgment text as reported

MUHAMMAD SALEEM (deceased) VS HABIB-UR-REHMAN S.13 (1)(a)---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 115---Suit for possession through pre-emption---Existence and enforcement of right of pre-emption---Distinction---Discrepancies in the statements/evidence of pre-emptor and his witness as to time, date and place of Talb-i-Muwathibat---Effect---Evidence beyond the scope of pleadings---Existence and enforcement of right of pre-emption are two distinct and different phenomena and merely having a superior right of pre-emption by itself is not sufficient to succeed in a suit for pre-emption---Pre-emptor has to establish the performance of necessary Talbs as required under S. 13 of the Act in order to succeed in a suit for pre-emption---Pre-emptor received information through PW.2 on 17.02.2011 at 10:00 a.m., when he was present in his house in presence of PW.3, however, while appearing as PW.1 the pre-emptor did not mention the time on which information was received from PW.2---Pre-emptor in his plaint stated that he attained knowledge about the sale of the suit land while sitting in his house, but plaint was silent about the exact portion of the house, which was a vast place and non-mentioning of the exact portion by itself was fatal to right of pre-emption---PW.3 did not make clear statement about the place of Talb-i-Muwathibat---PW-3 in his statement only deposed about the date of Talb-i-Muwathibat and did not state about the month and year regarding such material fact, which was fatal for pre-emption suit---Concurrent findings arrived at by both the courts below were based on proper appraisal of evidence and there was no misreading or non-reading of evidence on part of any of the court below---Revisional jurisdiction is to be exercised by High Court while keeping in view the principles enshrined in S .115 of the C.P.C.---Civil revision was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English