BI LA L KHAN vs MUNAWAR KHAN and another
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed against the judgment of the Peshawar High Court dismissing the petitioner's civil revision. The core legal question involved whether the sale of a vacant plot of land, alleged to be part of the village Shamlat, by a non-co-owner vendor to a non-co-owner vendee was valid against the Village Proprietary Body. The Supreme Court held that since the concurrent findings of fact by the lower appellate court and the High Court established that the suit land formed part of the village Shamlat and neither the vendor nor the vendee were co-owners in the village proprietary body, the sale was rightly declared void and ineffective regarding the interests of the Village Proprietary Body. The key principle laid down is that concurrent findings of fact regarding proprietary rights and village common lands will not be interfered with under leave to appeal when no substantial question of law or legal flaw is demonstrated.
- Whether the sale of a village Shamlat plot by a non-co-owner is void against the Village Proprietary Body?
- Will the Supreme Court interfere with concurrent findings of fact regarding village land ownership in a petition for leave to appeal without a substantial question of law?
ORDER
' ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.-- Bilal Khan petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of learned Single Judge of the Peshawar High Court, dated 9-4-1983, dismissing his civil revision in relation to a suit filed by Munawar Khan respondent in his representative capacity on behalf of the Village Proprietary Body, challenging the sale of a vacant plot of land sold by one Muhammad Saleem to Bilal Khan (petitioner herein).
2. The main contention in the suit was that the land in question was part of the village Shamlat but neither Muhammad Saleem vendor, nor Bilal Khan vendee, were co-owners in the said Shamlat.
Munawar Khan respondent/plaintiff sought a declaration that the sale in question was void with respect to the interests of the village Proprietary Body. Nine issues were framed and after recording the evidence, the learned trial Judge dismissed the suit with costs on 13-2-1982. Munawar Khan, respondent/plaintiff filed an appeal before the Additional District Judge, Kohat, who reversed the decision of the trial Court and decreed the suit in his favour. Feeling aggrieved Bilal Khan, vendee/defendant (petitioner) filed a civil revision in the High Court challenging the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge, Kohat. The High Court after discussing the evidence on the record upheld the finding of the Additional District Judge that the suit land was part of the village Shamlat and since neither vendor nor the vendee was owner in the Proprietary Body of the said village, as such the sale of the plot in dispute by Muhammad Saleem to Bilal Khan (petitioner) was void and ineffective qua the interests of the Village Proprietary Body.
' It is against this decision that Bilal Khan has filed the present petition for leave to appeal.
3. We heard the petitioner's counsel at length but find that he has not been able to raise any substantial question of law requiring determination by this Court nor has he been able to point out any flaw in the impugned judgment. We therefore do not think it a fit case for interference with the same. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.