' The petitioner seeks leave to appeal from the impugned judgment, dated 11-12-2006, passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Civil Revision No,1403 of 2006.
2. The suit of the petitioner for pre-emption of the suit-land measuring 16 Kanals and 12 Marlas was dismissed throughout on the ground that he had failed to satisfy the requirements of Talb-e- Muwathibat.
3. The learned counsel argued that date and time of Talb-e-Muwathibat could very well be ascertained from the plaint as well as from the statements of P.W.1 Wazir Muhammad Khan, P.W.2 Abdul Hameed and that of the petitioner P.W.3. The High Court and the Courts below took an erroneous view on the issue of Talbs.
4. On the other hand the learned counsel for the respondent Kafayatullah supported the impugned judgment of the High Court as well that of the Courts below.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have also perused the available record. In our view, the High Court as well as the subordinate Courts have justifiably recorded concurrent findings of fact on the point of non-performance of Talb-e-Muwathibat. In the absence of non-reading or misreading of material evidence, we are not expected to substitute such findings. No question of law of public importance is involved in this petition. The impugned judgment of High Court is plainly correct to which no exception can be taken. This is not a fit case for grant of leave to appeal.
6. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in this petition, which is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused.