ZUBAIDA BEGUM Versus MUHAMMAD KHAN

ORDER

1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑ In all these four cases wherein petitioners/ pre‑emptors have sought leave to appeal against separate judgments of the High Court in separate cases, one question is common; namely, whether the late deposit of the pre‑emption money in each case would deprive the decree‑holder of the benefit obtained through the decree. In one case, the delay occurred on account of the minority of the decree‑holder in connection with which, inter alia, interpretation of section 6 of the Limitation Act would be involved. In another case the question involved would be whether it is not permissible for an Appellate Court to grant extension of time or fresh time for deposit of pre‑emption money after decision in the appeal. Another related question would be whether in case the Appellate Court when permitting to grant such time exercises discretion in favour of the plaintiff and in fact grants time the High Court should set aside such an order. Similar other questions including the one about the lack of control over the circumstances by the plaintiff decree‑holder, would also need examination. A judgment of this Court in Bhai Khan v. Allah Bakhsh (1986 S C M R 849) has been cited by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/ pre‑emptors. Some of the questions involved are of general public importance. Leave to appeal is accordingly granted.

2. Security Rs.5,000 in each case.

3. The appeals shall be made ready on the present record with liberty to the parties to file additional documents.

4. M.B.A./Z‑32/8 Leave granted.