Malik SULTAN MAHMOOD Through Legal Heirs vs MUHAMMAD ARSHAD KHAN
This petition for special leave to appeal arose from a suit for pre-emption filed by the petitioner, which was initially dismissed by the trial court but subsequently decreed in the petitioner's favor by the Additional District Judge, Multan. The respondent challenged this decision through a revision petition in the High Court, which set aside the appellate decree and restored the trial court's judgment. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, having purchased specific field numbers from the sole owner of a Khata, could be considered a co-sharer in the remaining Khasra numbers of that same Khata, thereby establishing a superior right of pre-emption. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, holding that the petitioner, as a purchaser of specified field numbers from the sole owner, did not qualify as a co-sharer in the remaining property purchased by the respondent. The Court affirmed the principle that the purchase of specific field numbers from a sole owner does not confer the status of a co-sharer in the remaining portions of the Khata for the purposes of pre-emption.
- Does the purchase of specific field numbers from a sole owner of a Khata make the purchaser a co-sharer in the remaining Khasra numbers of that Khata?
- Can a purchaser of specific field numbers claim a superior right of pre-emption over the remaining property in the same Khata?
ORDER
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J: --This petition for special leave to appeal arises out of a suit for pre-emption filed by the petitioner. It was dismissed by the trial Court but on appeal it was decreed in his favour by the Additional District Judge, Multan. In revision preferred by the respondent, the High Court set aside the judgment and decree of the first appellate. Court and restored the Judgment of the trial Court.
2. The claim of the petitioner to superior right was based on the assertion that he was a co-shier in the Khata of which the land in dispute formed a part. It is to be noticed that the Khata was exclusively owned by one Waheed Muhammad who sold specific Khasra numbers of the Khata to the petitioner. Subsequently he sold other specified numbers to Mst. Kaniz Fatima who in turn sold the same to the respondent. As the petitioner was a purchaser of specified field numbers from the sold owner of the Khata he could not be regarded as a co---sharer in the remaining Khasra numbers included in the Khata. The High Court and the trial Court were, therefore, right in holding that he was not a co-sharer in the property ultimately purchased by the respondent. There is no merit in this petition and it is hereby dismissed.
Cited by 3 cases
- Abdul Latif vs Manzoor Ellahi 2025 YLR 911
- Khan vs Sheen Gul 2023 PHC 293
- Sheikh GHULAM QASIM through Legal heirs and others vs ABDULLAH KHAN 2011 YLR 1357