Pakistan Case LawMUHAMMAD YUSUF and 4 others Versus ALLAH YAR and 3 others
This is a petition for leave to appeal filed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, which dismissed the petitioners' civil revision and affirmed the lower courts' rejection of their plaint. The core legal question involved whether persons who allegedly acquired a lease over the suit land after the passing of a pre-emption decree could maintain a separate suit to challenge or frustrate the execution of that decree when they were not parties to the original pre-emption proceedings. The Supreme Court held that the petitioners, having acquired their alleged lease subsequent to the pre-emption decree and deriving their rights from the judgment-debtor, could not maintain a suit to defeat a decree that had already attained finality. The Court laid down the principle that subsequent lessees deriving rights from a judgment-debtor after the passing of a pre-emption decree have no legal standing to frustrate the execution of a final pre-emption decree.
- Whether a person who acquired a lease in respect of suit land after the passing of a pre-emption decree can maintain a suit to challenge the decree?
- Can subsequent lessees deriving rights from a judgment-debtor defeat a final pre-emption decree?
- Are non-parties to original pre-emption proceedings entitled to file suits to frustrate the execution of a pre-emption decree when their lease was acquired post-decree?
AJMAL MIAN, J.---This is a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment dated 3-4-1993 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court in Civil Revision No, 1463 of 1991 filed by the petitioners against the rejection of the plaint by the trial Court and affirmation of the same by the learned Appellate Court by orders dated 3-6-1991 and 17-7-1991 respectively, dismissing the same.
2.The brief facts are that respondents Nos. 1 and 2 filed a pre-emption suit against respondents Nos. 3 and 4 in respect of suit agricultural land, which was decreed by the trial Court on 13-3-1978. The above decree was affirmed in appeal by the learned Additional District Judge, Chiniot, a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court in second appeal and by this Court by declining a petition for leave to appeal. Thus, the pre-emption decree passed in favour of respondents Nos. 1 and 2 acquired finality. However, when they sought the execution of the above decree, the respondents attempted to frustrate the execution of the above decree by filing, inter alia, above civil suits, appeal and revision on the ground that they were the tenants of the suit land but their above attempt failed in view of the above orders passed by the above Courts. The petitioners have, therefore, filed present petition for leave to appeal against the above order dated 3-4-1993 of the learned Judge in Chambers.
3.In support of the above petition, Chaudhry Khan Muhammad Bajwa, learned Advocate Supreme Court; appearing for the petitioners, has contended that since the petitioners were not party to the above pre-emption proceedings, they were entitled to maintain the above suit.
The above contention is devoid of any force as admittedly the petitioners had allegedly acquired lease in 1984 in respect of the suit land after the pre-emption decree had already been passed on 13-3-1978. They were deriving their alleged right from the judgment-debtor and, therefore, they cannot defeat the above pre-emption decree which acquired the finality. In our view the impugned judgment is in consonance with law. Leave is refused.
Judges on this bench
- Ajmal Mian2,984 judgments
- Wali Muhammad Khan585 judgments