MUHAMMAD RAMZAN vs MEMBER (REV.), BOARD OF REVENUE and others
This matter arises from petitions for leave to appeal filed by pre-emptors against the dismissal of their pre-emption claims. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether a pre-emption decree could be passed in favour of a pre-emptor where no decree had been passed by any court at any stage prior to 31-7-1986. Relying on its previous precedent in the case of Sardar Ali (PLD 1988 SC 287), the Court held that since no decree was passed in favour of any of the petitioners prior to the crucial date of 31-7-1986, no decree could now be passed in their favour. Consequently, the Supreme Court refused leave to appeal and dismissed the petitions, affirming the principle that pre-emption claims lacking a pre-existing decree prior to the cutoff date cannot be decreed.
- Whether a pre-emption decree can be passed in favour of a pre-emptor if no decree was passed prior to 31-7-1986?
- Does the absence of a prior decree before the crucial date bar the passing of a pre-emption decree?
1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought in these cases by pre-emptors.
2. Their Lamed counsel have stated that no decree was passed in favour of any of them prior to 31-7- 1986 by any Court at any stage. That being so, no decree can be passed in favour of any of them now as held by this Court in case of Sardar Ali PLD 1988 SC 287. Leave to appeal accordingly is refused and the petitions are dismissed.