Munir Ahmed vs Mst — 2026 YLR 1161 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

Munir Ahmed VS Mst. Toheeda-tul-Hassan Ss. 2(a), 5 & 13---Suit for possession on basis of pre-emption---Immoveable property situated in an urban area or within Cantonments limits---Non-applicability of pre-emption law---Defendant moved an application for rejection of plaint on the ground that as the transaction related to a shop, so it was not pre-emptable; said application was allowed by Trial Court which order and decree was maintained by the District Court---Validity---Section 5 of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991 ('the Act, 1991') ordains that right of pre-emption shall arise in case of sale of immovable property while from the definition of immovable property as mentioned, at the time of promulgation of the Act, 1991, in its S.2(a), it is manifest that the immovable property, situated in an urban area or within Cantonments limits (as declared by any law relating to Local Bodies or Cantonments, as the case may be, for the time being in force), was excluded from the purview of immovable property---However, notably, the Act 1991 was then taken into consideration by the Federal Shariat Court and later the matter came before the Shariat Appellate Bench of Supreme Court of Pakistan which was concluded in case titled Haji RanaMuhammad Shabbir Ahmad Khan reported as PLD 1994 SC 1 ('Haji Rana Muhammad Shabbir Ahmad Rana case') and number of provisions of the Act 1991 were declared repugnant to the injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah of Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) w.e.f 31st December, 1993; it is, thus, clearly evident from the said conclusion (in Haji RanaMuhammad Shabbir Ahmad Khan case) that S.2(a) of the Act 1991 in so far as it excludes from the definition of immovable property, all properties situated in an urban area or within Cantonment limit was declared repugnant---In terms of Art. 189 of the Constitution, any decision of the Supreme Court shall, to the extent that it decides aquestion of low or is based upon or enunciates a principle of law, be binding on all other Court in Pakistan---Thus, the suit instituted by the petitioner was not hit by S.2(a) of the Act, 1991---High Court set-aside the impugned judgments and decrees passed by both the Courts below being tainted with material irregularities; as a sequel, suit of the petitioner would be deemed to be pending before the Civil Court which would be decided afresh strictly in accordance with law on its own merits---Revision, filed by plaintiff, was allowed accordingly.

Munir Ahmed vs Mst — 2026 YLR 1161 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 YLR