AIWZ KHAN Versus ALLAH BAKHSH

1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑This is vendees' appeal against the dismissal by the High Court of their Regular Second Appeal. It had arisen out of a decree for pre‑emption passed in favour of the respondent for the first time, after 31‑7‑1986. Leave granting order reads as follows:‑‑

2. "Relies on the judgment of this Court in Sardar Ali v. Muhammad Ali P L D 1988 S C 2$7 and the order dated 24‑5‑1988 of this Court reported in the same issue of the P L D (June 19813); in which, the case of Sardar Ali is reported, immediately after the report of said case ends. (See PLD 1988 SC 355). It, would not have been missed. It is observed therein that "nol decree can be passed now after the said date in favour of the pre‑emptors on any grounds‑co‑ownership, contiguity etc." Despite that the learned Judge has chosen to take a view contrary to the Supreme Court view.

3. This petition is converted into an appeal and fixed for hearing as soon as possible, during the next session‑within vacations, at Lahore. No security. Stay to continue, meanwhile. The appeal shall be prepared on the present record with direction to the parties to file all necessary documents. There will be no‑ adjournment.

4. The general effect of the impugned judgment is also suspended, meanwhile. Law reporters to be informed accordingly.

5. After noticing the reasoning of the .learned Judge we called upon the learned counsel for the respondent if he would like to defend the impugned judgment. It obviously was contrary to the judgment of this Court in the case of Sardar Ali PLD 1988 SC 287 and subsequent judgments and orders in pursuance thereof. Therefore, he remained unable to urge any point in support of this appeal. The impugned judgment, therefore, is set aside and consequently the respondent's suit is dismissed; with no order as to costs, because the learned counsel for the respondent did not take any unreasonable stand.

6. M. B. A./A‑323/S Appeal accepted.