1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, CJ.---Leave to appeal has been sought by the plaintiff in this pre- emption matter against the dismissal by the High Court of his Civil Revision. The petitioner filed the suit in this case after the decision by this Court in the case of Government of N: W.F.P v. Malik Said Kamal Shah PLD 1986 Supreme Court 360. The transaction brought under challenge was dated 4- 10-1986; i.e. After the said judgment had come into effect. In the suit the petitioner had, prima facie, taken up those pleas on the basis of which he might have succeeded on the grounds available in a case of (Muslim Shufa). The assertion was also made in the plaint regarding requirement of Talabs which, it was stated, had been fulfilled. Notwithstanding all this the petitioner's suit has been dismissed throughout on the ground that the supporting law contained in the Islamic Fiqh regarding pre-emption was not available to the petitioner.
2. This petition came up before this Court on 24-5-1989 for hearing. Mr.M.Munir Peracha, learned counsel for the petitioner raised the plea that the vacuum created by the judgment in the case of Malik Said Kamal Shah in the field of pre-emption law in so far as the statutory dispensation was concerned, had been filled automatically by Islamic Law of Shufa. The argument being attractive we permitted the learned counsel to further prepare the case on the line adopted by him. Today his senior Khawaja Farooq again asked him to argue the matter. He has relied on the case of Haji Nizam Khan v. Additional District Judge, Lyallpur and others PLD 1970 Lahore 930 for the general proposition advanced by him and has also sought the support from some of the judgments relied upon in that very case. He has further argued that the principle under the Islamic Law of Shufa which is being practised by the litigants and enforced by the Courts without legislative support in Sindh and Baluchistan, would also be attracted in the Punjab in those cases which arise after the target date in the case of Malik Said Kamal Shah. He has also for general support relied on Ahmed v. Aziz PLD1989SC771.
3. The questions raised are of general importance. We, accordingly, grant leave to appeal.
4. Security Rs.5,000 The appeal shall be prepared on present record with direction to the parties to file all those documents which shall be necessary for disposal thereof.