MUHAMMAD AMIN SHAH vs HAJI MUHAMMAD
This is a petition for special leave to appeal arising from a pre-emption suit. The petitioner challenged a registered sale deed through which land was purchased, while the respondent filed a suit for pre-emption claiming a superior right based on relationship to the vendors. The trial court decreed the suit, and the lower appellate court dismissed the appeal. The High Court partially modified the decree, dismissing the suit regarding the shares of certain vendors while maintaining it for others. The petitioner sought leave to appeal before the Supreme Court, raising contentions regarding the impact of the precedent in Government of N.-W.F.P. v. Malik Said Kamal Shah and the interpretation of the term 'person entitled to inherit land' under section 15(b) of the Pre-emption Act. The Supreme Court held that the contentions required consideration, granted leave to appeal, directed security, and ordered the maintenance of status quo.
- Can a pre-emptor claim a superior right of pre-emption on the basis of relationship with vendors in view of the rule laid down in Government of N.-W.F.P. v. Malik Said Kamal Shah?
- Whether a pre-emptor can be treated as a person entitled to inherit land under clause thirdly of section 15(b) of the Pre-emption Act with regard to maternal-aunts, maternal-cousins, and husbands of maternal-aunts?
- Section 15(b), Pre-emption Act
1. SAAD SAOOD JAN. J.--This is a petition for special leave to appeal and it arises in the following circumstances.
2. 2.Mst. Rabia Bibi and ten others sold 21 Kanals of land by a registered deed dated 10-12-1979 to the petitioner. On 16-12-1980 the respondent filed a suit for pre-emption claiming that he was a son of Mst. Rabia Bibi and a relations of the other ten vendors. The suit was decreed on 18-7-1982 by the Civil Judge, IInd Class, Gujrat. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Additional District Judge which was dismissed on 13-10-1985. The petitioner then filed a revision petition in the High Court. A learned Single Judge found that with regard to three of the vendors the respondent could not be regarded as a person who could inherit their property. Accordingly he dismissed the suit in so far as the shares of these vendors were concerned but dismissed the revision petition with regard to the shares of the other vendors. The petitioner now seeks leave to appeal against the decree granted to the respondent.
3. 3.In support of this petition two grounds have been raised: -
(i) in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Government of N.-W.F.P. v. Malik Said Kamal Shah PLD 1986 SC 360 it was not open to the respondent to claim superior right on the basis of relationship with the vendors; and
(ii) the respondent could not be treated as a person entitled to inherit land within the meaning of clause thirdly of section 15 (b) of the Pre-emption Act, as applicable to Muslims, with regard to his maternal-aunts, maternal-cousins and the husbands of the maternal-aunts.
4. Both these contentions need consideration. We grant leave to appeal to the petitioner. Security in the sum of Rs.2,500. The appeal may be made ready on the present record with liberty to the parties to add such documents as they may consider necessary. The order with regard to maintenance of status quo shall continue.