ABDUL HAMID vs MUHAMMAD ALI
The matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal against concurrent judgments of the lower courts and the High Court which decreed a suit for pre-emption regarding agricultural land based on ownership in the estate. The core legal question is whether the lower forums erred in granting pre-emption in light of the judgment rendered by the Shariat Appellate Bench in Government of N.-W.F.P. v. Said Kamal Shah. The Supreme Court held that the contention raised requires detailed examination and consequently granted leave to appeal. The key principle laid down is that petitions raising substantial questions regarding the applicability of pre-emption laws as interpreted by the Shariat Appellate Bench merit a full hearing.
- Whether pre-emption decrees passed prior to the judgment in Government of N.-W.F.P. v. Said Kamal Shah are sustainable?
- Does the right of pre-emption based on being an owner in the estate survive the Shariat Appellate Bench ruling?
ORDER
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--The respondent brought a suit for pre-emption arising out of a sale of agricultural land on the basis that he was an owner in the estate. The suit was decreed by the trial Court on 17-12-1984 and the appeal of the petitioner who was the vendee was dismissed by the District Judge on 26-10-1985. The petitioner filed a revision petition in. The High Court which too was 'dismissed on 19-4-1987.
2. In support of this petition it is contended that in view of the judgment of the Shariat Appellate Bench of this Court in Government of N.-W.F.P. v. Said Kamal Shah (P.L.D. 1986 S.C. 360) the High Court was in error in not interfering with the decisions of the Courts below. This contention needs examination. Leave to appeal is granted. Security for costs in the sum of Rs.2,000/-. The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with permission to the parties to file additional documents, if any.