Summary: S.13,14 Pre-emption Act:Requirements of Talabs (Talb-e-muwathibat),attorney is not substitute for pre-emptor

Summary: Background:This appeal is filed against the judgment and decree dated January 29, 2008, passed by the Additional District Judge, Hattian Bala, which upheld the Civil Judge's decision from July 30, 2007. The appellant-plaintiff?s suit for prior purchase and perpetual injunction was dismissed by the Civil Judge, and the decision was sustained by the Additional District Judge. The suit involved land comprising survey No.869/201, measuring 01 kanal 05 marlas, in village Raywand, Tehsil, and District Hattian Bala. The appellant, claiming co-ownership and possession, contested the sale of the land to the respondent without his consent and sought to exercise his right of prior purchase.----Issues:Whether the appellant-plaintiff?s suit for prior purchase without seeking possession of the suit land was maintainable.Whether the trial court and the first appellate court erred in dismissing the appellant?s suit on technical grounds.Whether the amendment to include "recovery of possession" in the plaint was wrongly denied by the trial court.----Holding/Reasoning/Outcome:Maintainability of Suit: The courts below dismissed the suit because the appellant did not seek possession of the disputed land. The trial court's framing of issues did not address the point of possession explicitly.Technical Grounds: The trial court?s decision was based on the technicality that the appellant did not seek possession of the land, despite having proved co-ownership and co-sharing.Amendment of Pleadings: The trial court rejected the appellant?s application to amend the plaint to include "recovery of possession," and the first appellate court upheld this decision.Outcome:The appeal was accepted, and the judgments and decrees dated January 29, 2008, and July 30, 2007, were set aside.The suit of the appellant-plaintiff for the right of prior purchase, including possession, was decreed, subject to the appellant depositing the sale consideration amount and expenses within two months.---Citations/Precedents:Order XX Rule 5 of Civil Procedure Code: The court must state its findings on each issue with reasons.Order VII Rule 7 of Civil Procedure Code: Relief can be granted by the court even if not specifically prayed for, to meet the ends of justice.AIR 1960 Patna 452: The court granted possession and partition relief, emphasizing the court's duty to address the rights of parties as they stand at the time of decree.Mst. Salma Abbasi & others V. Ahmed Suleman & 2 others (1981 CLC 462): Relief should not be denied due to a misframed suit if it meets justice.Mehrab Khan V. Province of Sindh and 5 others (2005 CLC 441): Courts can mold relief to meet the ends of justice, even if not specifically prayed for.Capt. S.M. Aslam and others Vrs. Karachi Building Control Authority and others (2005 CLC 759): Courts have the power to alter or mold relief to meet the ends of justice.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.