SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J: --The plaintiffs have preferred a direct appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 19-6-1989 whereby a pre--emption decree passed in their favour was set aside and their suit was dismissed.
2. This appeal is shown to be barred by 32 days. Apart from it, the learned counsel for the appellants Kh. Muhammad Yusuf Saraf has admitted that in view of the decisions subsequently given by this Court in Suo Motu Shariat Review Petition No.1-R of 1989 in Shariat Appeals Nos.4 and 5 of 1979 etc. PLD 1990 SC 865 followed by Mst. Aziz Begum and others v. Federation of Pakistan and others PLD 1990 SC 899 and Muhammad Yasin and others v. Khan Muhammad and others PLD 1990 SC 1060, he has no arguments to advance except to draw the attention of the Court to an earlier decision on the same subject by a learned Judge in Baldeo Misir v. Ramalagan Shukul (AIR 1924 Allahabad 82) in support of his point of view. He further wanted that it should be made clear that he would be free to avail of section 36 of the Punjab Pre-emption Ordinance, 1991 (Ordinance No.IX of 1991) for getting redress as may be admissible according to the law.
3. In view of our decisions referred to and the appeal being time-barred, we dismiss it and observe that certainly the appellants can avail of any other remedy that law makes available to them. With these observations, the appeal is dismissed.