A' LI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, J.--This is a petition for leave to appeal against the order of a learned Single Judge of the Peshawar High Court, abottabad Circuit, dated 2-4-1988.
2. Ghulam Hussain respondent had brought a suit against the petitioners possession of the land described in the plaint through pre-emption. It was that the vendor had sold the suit land for a consideration of Rs,15,000 but der to defeat the right of pre-emption by the respondent a fictitious amount Rs,1,30,000 as sale price was got entered into the sale mutation. It was also in the plaint that the respondent had superior right of pre-emption. The as contested and the pleadings of the parties resulted in the framing of as eight issues. Of them, issue No,1 was with regard to the superior right of emption, issue No,2 was with regard to the cause of action and issue No,6 was her the suit was within time. The learned Trial Court after recording the evidence produced by the parties decided all the above issues in favour of respondent by holding that the respondent had superior right of pre-emption, a cause of action and that the suit was within time. A decree was thus passed favour of the respondent vide judgment dated 17-3-1981 on payment Rs,1,30,000. The petitioners then filed an appeal which was heard by the learned District Judge, Mansehra, who vide his judgment dated 5-1-1982, dealing issue No,6 held the suit to be barred by time and thus dismissed the suit. Revision by the respondent, the learned Judge, however, vide his judgment da 2-4-1988, reversed the finding of the appellate Court. He held the suit to within time and restored the decree passed by the trial Court.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have g through the judgments of the Courts below and are of the view that the finding the learned trial and revisional Courts is based on correct appraisal of the oral well as documentary evidence led by the parties and is thus unexception Further, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that no has been passed before the target date, that is, 31st July, 1986, and, therefore, decree can be passed now is devoid of force because a decree in favour of respondent had been passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Manse on 17-3-1981, which was maintained by the High Court on 2-4-1988.
4. Thus finding no force in the petition the same is dismissed.