Mst. AZIZ BEGUM vs FATEH SHER and others
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by a vendee against a judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 6-6-1984, which allowed the respondents' Regular Second Appeal and restored the trial court's decree in their favour. The core legal question concerns the doctrine of partial pre-emption and the amendment of plaints in pre-emption suits. The Supreme Court held that the respondents' suit did not suffer from partial pre-emption, noting that the court has consistently applied a liberal interpretation regarding the amendment of plaints in similar circumstances. Consequently, the Court found no merit to interfere and refused to grant leave to appeal. The key principle laid down is that technical pleas regarding partial pre-emption must be evaluated in light of established liberal interpretations governing plaint amendments to advance substantial justice.
- Whether a pre-emption suit suffers from the bar of partial pre-emption under the circumstances of the case?
- How should the relevant law regarding the amendment of plaints be interpreted in pre-emption matters?
1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought by a vendee in a pre-emption matter against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 6-6-1984 whereby respondents'
2. Regular Second Appeal was allowed and the decree passed in their favour by the trial Court, was restored.
3. Learned counsel has pressed the point with regard to the bar of partial pre-emption against the respondents. When told that the argument is based on mere technicality otherwise in so far as the facts and circumstances are concerned, there is no doubt that the suit of the respondent did not suffer from partial pre-emption and further that this Court has dealt with the question of amendment of plaints in similar circumstances by giving a liberal interpretation of the relevant law.
4. The learned counsel was not able to press the point any further. Two judgments of this Court in similar circumstances were also pointed out. They are Sharif v. Muhammad Amir (1985 SCMR 1214), Naeem-ur-Rehman v. Muhammad Anwar (1986 SCMR 1488).
5. ' Two other judgments on question of amendment Mst. Ghulam Bibi v. Sarsa Khan (PLD 1985 SC 345), Muhammad Anwar v. Allah Bakhsh (1986 SCMR 1575) were also brought to our notice by R & R Officer.
6. ' In. The light of what has been stated above, this is not a fit case for the grant of leave to appeal.
7. Accordingly, the same is refused.