MUHAMMAD SHAFI Versus IMAM BAKHSH

ORDER

1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑ Leave to appeal has been sought by a vendee in a pre‑emption matter.

2. The controversy between the parties was whether as alleged by the petitioner, the transaction was a gift or as claimed by the respondents/ plaintiffs, it was sale.

3. The learned trial Court decreed the suit on the finding that it was a sale. The petitioner's appeal succeeded. It was held to be a gift. Accordingly, the suit was dismissed.

4. The respondents' civil revision was allowed by the High Court. It was found that the transaction was sale. The trial Court's judgment and decree having been restored, the petitioner/ vendee has now sought leave to appeal.

5. The learned counsel has contended that the High Court could not have interfered under section 115, C.P.C. in its revisional jurisdiction; and that the transaction was, in fact, gift and not sale.

6. After hearing the learned counsel, we are satisfied that the transaction was sale and that finding is unexceptionable. Regarding jurisdiction, suffice it to observe that the case is covered by sub‑clause (c) of subsection (1) of section 115, C.P.C., therefore, the High Court could interfere in its revisional jurisdiction.

7. There being no merit in this petition, leave to appeal, therefore, is refused.

8. M . I . / M‑561 / S Petition dismissed.