Syed CHIRAGH UD DIN vs SHAH ROOM KHAN And 6 Other
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal filed by a vendee against a decree for pre-emption affirmed by the High Court. The petitioner sought to avoid the pre-emption decree by arguing that the purchased land was intended for the expansion of a charitable institution, specifically a Darul Ulum, and thus fell under the exemption provided by Section 5, clause (b) of the N.-W.F.P. Pre-emption Act. The Supreme Court examined whether the land, at the time of the transaction, constituted a part of the existing charitable institution. The Court held that because the land was not part of an existing building or institution at the time of the sale, it did not qualify for the statutory exemption. The Court affirmed that the exemption applies only to property that already constitutes a Darul Ulum or a part thereof at the time of the transaction. Consequently, the Court refused leave to appeal, determining that the petitioner's intended future use of the land did not satisfy the requirements of the Act.
- Does the purchase of land for the future expansion of a charitable institution qualify for exemption from pre-emption under the N.-W.F.P. Pre-emption Act?
- Is land that is not part of an existing charitable institution at the time of sale exempt from pre-emption under Section 5(b) of the N.-W.F.P. Pre-emption Act?
- Section 5, clause (b), N.-W.F.P. Pre-emption Act
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, C.J.---Leave to appeal has been sought by the vendee/defendant in a suit for pre-emption; against the dismissal by the High Court, of his Civil Revision.
2. It is stated by the learned counsel that the petitioner purchased the land in dispute "for the purpose of Wakf to accommodate Darul Ulum". This land, as explained by the learned counsel, would be utilised to build additional accommodation/building as the already existing, Darul Ulum, said to have been established by the petitioner, needed expansion.
3. The respondent/plaintiff side has succeeded throughout and a decree for pre-emption has been passed and affirmed against the petitioner.
4. Leave to appeal has been sought on the ground urged before the lower Courts but without any success; namely that under section 5, clause (b) of the N.-W.F.P. Pre-emption Act, the Darul Ulum being a charitable institution, the purchase thereof would be exempt from pre-emption.
5. When it was pointed out to the learned counsel that it is not an existing building or a part of building or land which already constitutes a part of a Darul Ulum which might have been purchased by the petitioner which would then be exempt under the said cited provision. Here, the land at the time of transaction was neither the Darul Ulum itself nor a part thereof, hence the transaction does not come within the language used in section 5, clause (b) of the N.-W.F.P. Pre- emption Act, so as to qualify for exemption. Learned counsel could not overcome this difficulty nor could he advance the case any further. Leave to appeal, accordingly is refused.