NIAZ ALI vs ABDULLAH KHAN and otherss
This matter arises from a petition filed against the dismissal of a second appeal by the High Court, which had affirmed the lower appellate court's judgment dismissing the petitioner's pre-emption suit. The petitioner, Niaz Ali, sought to pre-empt a sale of land made by his alleged mother, among others, claiming a superior right of pre-emption as her son. The core legal question was whether the petitioner successfully established his maternity and legitimate descent from the vendor to sustain his pre-emption claim. The Supreme Court held that the concurrent findings of fact by the lower appellate courts—holding that the petitioner failed to prove he was the son of the vendor through the evidence on record, including the testimony of his father—were unexceptionable and suffered from no illegality. The petition for leave to appeal was accordingly dismissed. The key principle laid down is that concurrent factual findings regarding pedigree and lineage in pre-emption suits, when based on a proper appreciation of evidence, warrant no interference by the apex court.
- Whether concurrent findings of fact regarding lineage and paternity can be interfered with by the Supreme Court without showing legal infirmity?
- Does the failure of a pre-emptor to establish familial relationship with the vendor defeat a pre-emption suit?
- Is non-production of a pedigree-table at trial a material factor in determining descent?
ORDER
' KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY, J.--- The petitioner filed a suit in the Court of a learned Civil Judge at Layyah to pre-empt the sale of land made by Muhammad Bakhsh, his mother Mst. Jannat and his sister Mst. Amiran Mai to the respondents on the ground that he was a son of the said Mst. Amiran Mai vendor. The learned trial Court decreed the said suit but the learned first appellate Court set aside the said decree and judgment and dismissed the suit on the ground that Niaz petitioner had not been able to establish that he was a son of the said Mst. Amiran Mai vendor. The second appeal bearing R.S.A. No,10 of 1988 filed by Niaz petitioner was dismissed confirming the findings of the first Appellate Court.
2. Hence this petition.
3. It is admitted on record that the father of Niaz petitioner, namely, Bagh Ali had two wives and it had been found by the two learned appellate Courts that Niaz petitioner could not prove that he was the son of Bagh Ali through Mst. Amiran Mai vendor. The learned Judge in Chamber had once again examined the entire evidence and had found that the father of the petitioner, namely, Bagh Ali who had appeared at the trial as P.W.3 in his capacity as the next friend of Niaz Ali who was then a minor had never stated that Niaz petitioner was his son from Mst. Amiran Mai. It had also been noticed by the learned High Court that the said Bagh Ali never appeared in the affirmative evidence to establish the superior pre-emptory right of the petitioner and had appeared at the trial only in rebuttal. The learned Judge had also considered the effect of the testimony of P. W.1 and P.W.2 and the effect of non-production of pedigree-table of the petitioner at the trial and had come to the conclusion that no exception could be taken to the findings of the learned first appellate Court on the said question which findings were consequently affirmed by the Honourable High Court.
4. We have heard the learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner at some length who could not point out any illegality in the said concurrent findings of the two learned appellate Courts.
5. This petition is, therefore, dismissed. Leave refused.