' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--This petition by a vendee in a pre-emption matter calls in question the dismissal of his writ petition by the High Court.
2. There is no more dispute about the weaker right of the petitioner as compared to the respondent-pre-emptor's side.
3. The petitioner, in person, sought adjournment on account of absence of his counsel. The same having been refused, we have examined the case as was sought to be made out from the petitioner's side before the lower forum and before the High Court.
The controversy now revolves around the issue whether the transaction having come to the knowledge of the plaintiff, he was not estopped by his conduct when he instead of taking the bargain forthwith (regarding which another agreement was also allegedly drawn), sought time from the vendor because he had no money with him.
4. Prima facie the decision in this behalf by the Additional Commissioner to the effect that the bar of estoppel will apply to the pre-emptor's case was correct; and, it needs to be examined whether the learned Member, Board of Revenue, was right is upsetting that decision in his revisional jurisdiction. It also needs to be examined whether the High Court could not have set aside the judgment of the Member, Board of Revenue, in its Constitutional jurisdiction.
' Leave to appeal, accordingly, is granted. Security Rs,5,000 ' The appeal shall be prepared on the present record with direction to the parties to file all necessary documents.