ABDUR RAHMAN KHAN, J.--- Plaintiff filed suit for possession through pre-emption in respect of the disputed property. The vendee/defendant submitted an application under Order 7, Rule 11, CPC to the effect that the property is not covered by the definition of urban immovable property as it situated in Cantonment Area and, therefore, is exempt from pre-emption. This Application was allowed by the Trial Court which order was affirmed by appellate Court and also confirmed by the High Court.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that in view of the judgment "Haji Rana M. Shabbir Ahmed Khan vs. Govt. Of Punjab Province, Lahore" (PLD 1994 S.C. 1), the disputed property was made pre-emptiable. However, it is admitted position that at the time of sale and at the time of institution of the pre-emption suit the property in question could not be made subject- matter of pre-emption suit. The grievance of learned counsel for the petitioner is that he was not allowed an opportunity to substantiate that the property in dispute does not lie in Cantonment area. Petitioner has not pleaded so in his written statement and moreover, the case was admittedly decided on facts patent on record which needed no evidence. It is admitted position that right of pre-emption was not available to the petitioner at the time of sale and at the time of institution of suit. Therefore, we find no legal infirmity in the impugned judgment. This petition is dismissed and leave is refused.