HASSAN KHAN Versus ZAHEERULLAH

ORDER

MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑ ‑This is plaintiffs' petition for leave to appeal in a pre‑emption matter.

2. The petitioners' suit was decreed by the trial Court. The respondents' appeal was allowed by the District Court and petitioner's suit was dismissed. The High Court dismissed petitioners' Regular Second Appeal and affirmed the decision of the First Appellate Court. The petitioners have now sought leave to appeal.

3. The respondents/ vendees had filed a suit for specific performance of contract of sale which was decreed in their favour. The petitioners treated the decree as "sale" and filed suit for pre emption. It has been held in the impugned judgments that unless the decree for specific performance is followed by documents completing the sale, the same could not in law be treated as sale; and, because in this case all the necessary documents had not yet been completed, therefore, the sale in legal sense had not taken place.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners, on the other hand, has relied on Abdul Karim v. Fazal Muhammad Shah P L D 1967 S C 411 to contend that in the circumstances of this case, sale would be deemed to have taken place when the decree for specific performance was passed in favour of the respondents/ vendees. It would also need examination whether sale had not taken place by virtue of the decision of the Court and that the completion of the documents or acceptance of the decree by the judgment‑debtor, are only formalities which could not change the form and date of sale or that of the decree for specific performance. Leave has also been granted in C.P.76/85 on 9‑3‑1986 to examine the scope of the word "sale" in such like cases.

5. After hearing both the learned counsel, we consider it a fit case for grant of leave to appeal. Security Rs.5,000. The appeal shall be prepared on the present record with liberty to the parties to file additional documents, if necessary. To be heard with appeal out of C.P. 76 of 1985.

M.B.A./H‑40/S Leave granted.