MUHAMMAD NAEEM and others vs GHULAM MUHAMMAD and others
This appeal by leave arises from a pre-emption suit filed by the respondents claiming a superior right to purchase land measuring 35 Kanals 18 Marlas, which was decreed by the trial court and upheld in first appeal and regular second appeal. The core legal question was whether the plaintiffs-respondents had established their preferential right of pre-emption through sufficient legal evidence regarding their alleged relationship with the vendor. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that where the pre-emptors produced no oral or documentary evidence whatsoever—not even appearing themselves or producing witnesses, but merely having their counsel tender a copy of pedigree-tables—to prove their relationship with the vendor, the pre-emption suit cannot be decreed. The Court allowed the appeal and set aside the lower courts' judgments, laying down the principle that mere tendering of pedigree-tables by counsel without supporting evidence to link them to the claimants is insufficient to prove a superior right of pre-emption.
- Whether a pre-emptor can establish a superior right of pre-emption without producing oral or documentary evidence to prove their relationship with the vendor?
- Is the mere tendering of a pedigree-table by a counsel in court sufficient proof of a pre-emptor's preferential right?
- Can a pre-emption suit be decreed in the complete absence of evidence supporting the plaintiff's claimed relationship to the vendor?
' ABDUL SHAKURUL SALAM, J.----This appeal by leave arises in the following circumstances: ' The appellants purchased land measuring 35 Kanals 18 Marlas in Mauza Kat Hashmat, Tehsil Hafizabad, District Gujranwala from Mst. Inayat Bibi daughter of Muhammad Din for a consideration of Rs,14,118 through a registered sale-deed dated 7-9-1972. The respondents filed a suit for pre-emption claiming preferential right to purchase. Relevant Issue No,1 was framed to the following effect: "Whether the plaintiffs have got superior right of pre-emption?"
' Finding that in favour of the plaintiffs-respondents, the suit was decreed by the learned Civil Judge, 1st Class, Hafizabad vide judgment and decree dated 17-7-1975. Appellants-vendees' first appeal was dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Gujranwala vide judgment and decree dated 31-5-1979 and their Regular Second Appeal No,807 of 1979 by a learned Judge of the Lahore High Court vide judgment and decree dated 11-12-1979.
2. Contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that excepting producing pedigree-tables through a counsel the plaintiffs-respondents led no evidence whatsoever to prove that they were related to the vendor to have the superior right of pre-emption as alleged by them. Learned counsel referred to Muhammad Hussain v. Muhammad Khan, (1989 SCM R 1026) and submitted that where the pre-emptors had merely tendered a copy of pedigree-table ,showing their relationship with vendor in proof of preferential right of preemption without there being any evidence to show that such pedigree-tables pertained to the pre-emptors, the suit was dismissed.
In the case in hand, the learned counsel submitted that no witness at all, not even the plaintiffs- respondents appeared in support of the preferential claim to say as to how the plaintiffs were related to the vendor. Even the pedigree-tables were not produced by them. Only their learned counsel tendered the same in Court.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents in view of the record could not controvert the contention.
4. In view of the above circumstances and in the absence of any evidence whatsoever on behalf of the plaintiffs-respondents to say that they were related to the vendor their suit could not be decreed. The appeal is, therefore, allowed. But the parties are left to bear their own costs.
Cited by 8 cases
- Mst. Badami and others vs Mst. Budhee and others 2024 MLD 534
- GHULAM MOHY-UD-DIN (deceased) Versus MUHAMMAD SANA ULLAH (deceased) 2016 MLD 1030
- ALI BAHADUR Versus NAZIR BEGUM 2005 PLD 218
- Khalil Ahmad And 3 Other vs Muhammad Ameer K.L.R 2003 Revenue Cases 66
- Khalil Ahmad & 3 Other vs Ghulam Qasim And Other K.L.R. 2003 Revenue Cases 66
- KHALIL AHMAD And 3 Others vs MUHAMMAD AMEER 2003 YLR 608
- FAZAL MUHAMMAD And Others vs Mst. ZAAINAB BIBI And Other 2001 MLD 2012
- ALLAH YAR and 18 others vs GHULAM JILANI and 3 others 1995 PLD Lahore 409