Muhammad Sharif Through Mst. Irshad Bibi, Etc. vs Walayat Khan
This petition for leave to appeal arises from a pre-emption matter where the petitioner, as the pre-emptor, challenged the judgment of the Lahore High Court. The High Court had reversed the decision of the Appellate Court, effectively non-suiting the petitioner on the grounds that he failed to establish the essential legal requirements of 'Talab-i-Muwathibat' and 'Talab-i-Ishad'. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the High Court erred in its assessment of the evidence regarding the performance of these mandatory 'talabs'. Upon review, the Supreme Court noted that the Trial Court had previously found that while the disputed sale occurred on April 4, 1995, the petitioner performed the first 'Talab' only on July 18, 1995. Given that the law mandates the performance of the first 'Talab' within fifteen days of the completion of the sale, the petitioner failed to meet this statutory obligation. Finding no misreading or non-reading of material evidence by the High Court, the Supreme Court upheld the lower court's findings, affirming that the petitioner's failure to adhere to the prescribed timeline rendered his claim unsustainable, and consequently dismissed the petition.
- Is a pre-emptor required to perform the first 'Talab' within fifteen days of the completion of the sale?
- Can a High Court's finding on the performance of 'Talabs' be interfered with if there is no misreading of evidence?
ORDER TASSADDUQ HUSSAIN JILLANI, J.--Petitioner/pre-emptor has been non-suited by the learned Lahore High Court and Appellate Court's judgment was reversed on the ground that he failed to prove "Talab-i- Muwathibat" and "Talab-i-Ishad".
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned High Court has misread and non- read the material evidence with regard to the performance of "talabs" and that the judgment is not sustainable.
3. While disbelieving the evidence produced by the petitioner with regard to the performance of "Talabs" the High Court concurred with the learned Trbunal court court on issue No. 13 and observed as under While deciding issue No. 13 the learned Trial Court observed that the plaintiff has produced his evidence to prove that he has completed the requirements of Talabs according to law enforced The learned Trial Court while discussing the evidence of PW-3 Qalb-e- Hussain, PW-4 Nadar Hussain and Muhammad Sharif, PW-5 observed that the plaintiff completed the requirement of Talab-i-Muwathibat on 18.7.1995 but according to the contents of the plaint the disputed sale was completed on 4 4 1995 and the first Talab was completed on 18.7.1995 while the plaintiff was under obligation to complete first Talab within 15 days of the completion of sale."
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not referred to any piece of evidence which cloud persuade us to interfere with the afore-referred finding of the High Court as also of the Trial Court.
That being' so, we do not find any merit in this petition which is dismissed and .