Pakistan Case Law
2003 C.L.R. 1040

Nazir Ahmad vs Jan Muhammad and others

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2003 C.L.R. 1040
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petitions Nos. 2633-L and 2634-L of 2001
Date2002-03-26
Judge(s)Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday, Munir A. Sheikh
Resultd. Leave Refused
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter came before the Supreme Court of Pakistan via petitions for leave to appeal challenging a judgment of the Lahore High Court regarding a suit for pre-emption. The core legal question was whether a sale of land by an allottee of evacuee property is subject to a pre-emption suit if the allottee had not yet paid the required settlement fee to the Settlement Department, thereby allegedly lacking full ownership rights. The Supreme Court dismissed the petitions, upholding the impugned judgment. The Court held that the sale of land by a confirmed allottee of evacuee property is indeed pre-emptiable, regardless of whether the settlement fee has been paid to the Federal Government. The Court affirmed the principle that the issue of payment of the settlement fee is strictly a matter between the allottee and the Federal Government and does not affect the pre-emptibility of the transaction. Consequently, the vendee who purchases such land cannot claim immunity from a pre-emption suit based on the allottee's failure to satisfy settlement dues.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Is a sale of land by a confirmed allottee of evacuee property subject to a suit for pre-emption?
  • Does the non-payment of a settlement fee by an allottee of evacuee land render the property immune from pre-emption?
pre-emptionevacuee propertysettlement feeallottee rightsownership rights

MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.--- The only ground on which the suit of pre-emption of the respondents in both the petitions was contested, was that the petitioner had purchased the land from an allottee of evacuee land from the Settlement Department who having not paid the settlement fee, therefore, was not vested with full ownership rights, as such, the sale made in favour of the petitioner was not pre-emptiable. It has been held in the case of Haji Sultan Muhammad and another v. Muhammad Siddiqe, PLD 1973 SC 347 that where the confirmed allottee of evacuee land, sells the land, the same is pre-emptiable. The question of payment of settlement fee to the Federal Government by such an allottee was a matter between the allottee and the Federal Government and the vendee in such a case having purchased the land as such was not immune from pre-emption suit.

2. No ground has been made out for interference with the well-reasoned impugned judgment passed by the Lahore High Court, therefore, these petitions are dismissed and leave refuse .

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.