ORDER FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J-- The petitioners seek leave to appeal against judgment dated 4.10.1999 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Regular Second Appeal No. 76 of 1978.
2. The facts of the case are that late Jani predecessor- in-interest of the petitioners was owner of agricultural land measuring 103 kanals and 8 marlas situate at Chak No. 486/GB, Tehsii Samundri, District Faisalabad. He sold his 93/2068 share in favour of the respondents through a registered sale-deed dated 21.1.1967. Mutation No. 210 was accordingly sanctioned by the Assistant Collector.
Late Jani filed a suit for declaration in respect of a separate piece of land in Square No. 29, Killa No. 1112 which was decreed by the Civil Court-on 14.6.1967 pursuant to special Oath taken by petitioner No. 1. The Revenue Officer concerned, by order dated 21.4.1968 reviewed the sale mutation No. 210 on the ground of violation of the provisions of the Land Reforms Regulation (MLR 64 of 1959) as a case of partial sale. Therefore, the respondents filed a civil suit for declaration that the sale-deed dated 21.1.1967 and the mutation No. 210 were valid and that the order dated 21.4.1968 of review of mutation by the Revenue Officer was without jurisdiction. The civil suit of the respondents was decreed by the Civil Judge on 20.10.1975 The first appeal and the regular second appeal of the petitioners were dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Faisalabad and the Lahore High Court, Lahore respectively vide judgments dated 8.1.1978 and 4.10.1999. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
3. The learned counsel, inter alia, argued 'that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to determine the question of violation or otherwise of the provisions of the Land Reforms Regulation, in view of paragraphs Nos. 25 and 27 of the said Regulation, lt was further argued that without exhausting the statutory remedies provided by the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967, the respondents could not invoke the jurisdiction of the Civil Court against the order of review of mutation passed by the Revenue Officer.
4. Leave is granted to consider the above contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners.