1. ' MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J.--Bcharamand respondent.$1o.1, herein, filed a suit seeking a declaration that the decree passed in Civil Suit No,72/1 of 1979 was ineffective as against him and that it was obtained as a result of collusion and fraud between Umar Ayaz, petitioner No,1, herein, and Mohabat Mian, respondent No,2, herein.
2. ' Respondent No,2 had, in that suit against petitioner No,1, sought possession of the property (Swaro Gato) through pre-emption as on the allegation that it was sold to him by one All Muhammad.
3. ' The appellate Court .Held that it was not a collusive decree as petitioner No,1 himself had admitted in his statement before the Trial Court while withdrawing his application for the setting aside of the decree that it was rightly passed.
4. ' However, it appears that the son of respondent No,1 entered into a transaction of exchange of the property of his father with petitioner No,1 whercunder property known as 'Mainz Oba' belonging to his father was given in exchange for the property called 'Swam Gato' which was the subject-matter of the pre-cmption suit. The appellate Court held that this deed of exchange was ineffective as the son of respondent No,1 had no authority to exchange his father's property with that of petitioner No,1, aid as that was in possession of petitioner No,1 he modified the decree to the extent that respondent No,l. Was given the possession of the land known as 'Mainz Oba' whose possession hitherto was with the petitioner No,1 on payment of Rs,14,000. The modified decree was affirmed by the High Court in revision.
5. The finding on this aspect was one of fact and as the petitioner No,1 himself took no step to get the pre-emption decree set aside, he was bound to hand over the possession of the land (Mainz Oba) to respondent No,1, herein.