A sale of 2 kanals of agricultural land made by Muhammad Hayat for a consideration of Rs.7,000 was sued out by Mst. Sardaran Bibi to be pre-empted on the ground of her being a real sister of the vendor and a co-sharer in the Khata. Vendee contested the suit by denying superior right of pre- emption of the plaintiff with the assertion that he himself is a collateral of the vendor. On the basis of evidence, trial Court concluded that both parties are related to the vendor in the manner alleged and also found the pre-emptor a Khatadar of the suit land and. By its judgment decreed the suit upon paying within one month a sum of Rs.4,000 for the conclusion reached that the sale had actually been effected for a buffalo priced thus.
2. Appeal thereagainst filed by the vendee was awaiting to be heard by an Additional District Judge when Mst. Sardaran pre-emptor died leaving behind one minor son and two minor daughters as her legal-representatives who were duly impleaded in her stead on the basis of amended memo of appeal, through their maternal-uncle Muhammad Hayat (the vendor) acting as their guardian-ad---item. Learned appellate Judge heard the appeal and while examining the respective rights of pre-emption of the plaintiff and the vendee on the basis of their relationship with the vendor came to the view that since they happen to be possessed of the right to inherit the vendor respectively as a sharer and residuary, therefore, such rights of the parties have to take effect simultaneously to the extent determined by the personal law so that none of them may exclude the other from inheritance and their rights happened to be at par in view of the law laid down in Mst. Shahzad Bibi and another v. Gulzar Khan PLD 1973. Lah 878, He also took notice of the additional inferior qualification possessed by the plaintiff and concluded on the authority of AIR 1926 Lah 300 that superiority of right of pre-emption is not capable of being determined thereupon in favour of the plaintiff and by his judgment dated 4-7-1984 accepted the appeal of the vendee to reverse the trial Court decree into dismissing the suit.
3. The said three minor legal-representatives of the original plaintiff have now come up to this Court on revision with the vendor Muhammad Hayat acting as their next-friend. It is unthinkable that, except where a pre-emptor may happen to be acting in collusion with the vendor, there may not be clash of interest between the pre-emptor and a vendor.
4. Be the above as it may, the proposition of law followed in the appeal below is too well established and has been consistently propounded for over three quarters of a century without any dissention and has even been affirmed at highest levels, in the Privy Council in Sabz A.I Khan v.
Khair Muhammad Khan ILR 3 Lah 48 and in the Supreme Court of Pakistan in Jalal Din v. Saeed Ahmad PLD 1979 SC 879 which has been re-affirmed now in Mst. Raz Khanum Bibi v. Nazir Ahmad and others 1985 SCM R 1725 after examining a chain of authorities.
5. Perhaps it was due to the realization of the weakness of the case of the petitioners that their counsel secured admission of the revision-petition to regular hearing with the assertion that the vendee has been proved on the record to be a collateral of the vendor and even if he may have been accepted to be so related to him, he could not inherit the vendor upon his death being assumed have taken place on the date of sale. During the hearing now, he has not even casually raised this argument and has had to concede that in the presence of concurrent findings below with regard to relationship of the parties with the vendor and clear enunciation of the law, he does not have to urge anything in support of this case.
6. Result of the foregoing is that the appellate decree of dismissal of the pre-emption suit is altogether unexceptionable and no case exists at all for interference therewith. This revision- petition is completely devoid of substance and the same is accordingly dismissed but in view of minority of the petitioners there is not passed any order for costs.
H.B.T/S-568/L