MUHAMMAD HALEEM Versus ANAYAT BIBI

1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑ For the reasons stated in the restoration application, C . P. 1090 of 1980 is restored.

2. In support of the main petition which has been filed by the vendee in a pre‑emption matter against the dismissal of his Regular Second Appeal by the High Court, learned counsel initially raised two points. They are: (1) that the respondent's suit should have been dismissed on ground of limitation connected with the ‑question of deficiency in court‑fee; and (2) that the respondent had failed to establish his superior right of pre‑emption.

3. During the arguments the learned counsel gave up the first point on account of the judgment of this Court in the case of Siddique Khan P L D 1984 S C .289. Regarding the second point, the learned counsel stated that after rejecting the documentary evidence of both the sides, the learned trial Court should not have believed the oral evidence produced by the respondent.

4. The argument raised by the learned counsel relates to findings of fact and/or believing or not believing the respondent's witnesses.

5. After hearing him on this point, we have not been able to find any error legal or otherwise in the impugned judgment. The petition accordingly is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused.

6. M . I . / G‑131/ S Petition dismissed.