Pakistan Case Law← Search
1970 SCMR 651

AMANULLAH KHAN AND Others vs KHAN ATTAULLAH KHAN AND Other

Citation1970 SCMR 651
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 3-P of 1970
Date1970-03-28
Judge(s)Hamoodur Rahman, Mujibur Rahman Khan
ResultLeave refused

1. HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C. J.-This is a petition for special leave to appeal from an order, passed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of West Pakistan, Peshawar Seat, in the revisional jurisdiction.

2. It appears that on the basis of a decree dated the 27th September 1967, the petitioners and some others got 1167 kanals and 10 marlas of land, situated in village Masha Mansoor from one Hamidullah for Rs. 1,50,000. The respon--dent Ataullah Khan sought to pre-empt the transaction, alleging that it was really a sale by Hamidullah in favour of the petitioners. In this pre-emption suit a Civil Judge asked the pre-emptor to deposit Rs. 5,000 as the probable value of the land sought to be pre-empted under section 23, subsection (1) of the N.-W. F. P. Pre-emption Act, 1950.

3. The petitioners went up in revision to the High Court against the said order, alleging that the amount had been fixed arbitrarily. According to them the probable value was the value mentioned in the decree, namely, Rs. 1,50,000. The High Court, however, took the view that since the lands were mostly Barani, Rs. 20 per kanal would be a fair assessment of the probable value of the land, and ordered the pre-emptor to deposit pre-emption money at the said rate within the period fixed by the Civil Judge.

4. The petitioners now seek special leave to appeal. N serious question of law is involved in this case and it is no' the function of this Court to make assessments of the probable value of the land at this stage. If the petitioners think that the amount of the consideration has been arbitrarily fixed, they should raise this point as an issue in the pre-emption suit itself, and have it decided in the trial Court.

5. This petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

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