MUHAMMAD ZAMAN KHAN and 10 others vs MUHAMMAD RAMZAN KHAN
This review petition arises from a judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan concerning a pre-emption dispute. The petitioners raised two new contentions: first, that the respondent pre-emptor had sold the disputed land during the pendency of the appeal, thereby demonstrating a lack of interest in the property; and second, that the petitioners were entitled to the current market value of the land rather than the original sale price. Regarding the first point, the Court held that the document produced was merely an agreement to sell, not a completed sale, and further clarified that a pre-emptor who successfully exercises their superior right is not legally barred from disposing of the property in the future. Regarding the second point, the Court affirmed that under the Punjab Pre-emption Act in force at the relevant time, a pre-emptor is entitled to acquire the land at the price actually paid by the vendee to the vendor. Consequently, the Court dismissed the review petition, holding that the petitioners were entitled only to the original sale price as decreed, not the current market value.
- Does an agreement to sell property by a pre-emptor during the pendency of an appeal constitute a forfeiture of the right of pre-emption?
- Is a pre-emptor entitled to acquire land at the current market value or the price actually paid by the vendee under the Punjab Pre-emption Act?
- Can a pre-emptor who has acquired land through a superior right dispose of that land in the future?
- Punjab Pre-emption Act 1913
ORDER
' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---In this petition for review of the judgment of this Court two entirely new points have been taken. These are:
(1) During the pendency of the petition for special leave to appeal in this Court the respondent who was a pre-emptor had sold the land in dispute to a third person; this indicated that he was never interested in acquiring the land in dispute for himself by exercising the right of preemption; and
(2) the petitioners were entitled to receive the present market value of the land in dispute and not the price which they had paid to the vendor.
So far as the first contention is concerned we have seen the document produced by the petitioners in support of their assertion. It is merely an agreement to sell in future and does not constitute a sale by itself. There is no law which would stand in the way of a pre-emptor who has acquired land by exercising his superior right to dispose it of in future. As regards the second contention there is no legal basis for the same. It is to be noticed that the sale impugned in the suit took place before 6-7-1977, the respondent's suit was decreed for the first time by the District Judge on 15-6-1981 and the petitioners' appeal before the High Court was dismissed on 24-2-1986. Under the Punjab Pre- emption Act in force at the relevant time a pre-emptor was entitled to acquire the land sold in violation of his right at the price actually paid by the vendee to the vendor. This is the price which will be paid to the petitioners under the decree passed against him. He is not entitled to anything beyond that in this case.
2. This review petition is without merit and is hereby dismissed.
Cited by 1 case
- Messrs WALIA STEEL INDUSTRIES PLC vs Messrs SAGA SHIPPING AND TRADING 2019 PLD Sindh 22