livelawpk.com - The Limitation Period for Pre-Emption suits Begins ---

The Limitation Period for Pre-Emption suits Begins from the Date of Attestation of Mutation, irrespective of Whether a Public Notice was issued under Section 31 of Pre-emption Act --- Lahore High Court, Lahore

6 days, 20 hours
12

Islamabad 16-12-2024: The Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, dismissed a Civil Revision Petition filed by Adil Khalil Sattar challenging the concurrent findings of two lower Courts, which had rejected his suit for possession through pre-emption. Mr. Justice Mirza Viqas Rauf upheld the decisions of the trial and appellate Courts, reaffirming the strict interpretation of the limitation period under the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991.

The Petitioner sought possession of land through pre-emption, claiming that the Respondent, Saad Nasim Khan, had purchased the property via a mutation dated December 22, 2015. The Petitioner alleged he learned of the sale on September 29, 2016, and promptly performed the necessary Talbs (notices to assert pre-emption rights). However, the suit was filed on October 15, 2016, beyond the four-month limitation period prescribed by the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991.

The Respondent successfully moved for the rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (C.P.C.), arguing that the claim was time-barred. Both the trial Court and the Appellate Court dismissed the Petitioner’s case.

The primary issue revolved around the computation of the limitation period under Section 30 of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991. The Petitioner argued that no public notice was issued under Section 31 of the Act at the time of the attestation of mutation, and therefore, the limitation period should commence from the date of his knowledge of the sale.

Mr. Justice Mirza Viqas Rauf rejected the Petitioner’s arguments, emphasizing that Section 30(b) of the Act clearly states that the limitation period for pre-emption suits begins from the date of attestation of mutation, irrespective of whether a public notice was issued under Section 31. The Court further clarified that Sections 30 and 31 are independent provisions, with Section 31 having no bearing on the limitation period prescribed by Section 30.

Citing landmark judgments, including Mst. Kausar Parveen Vs. Muhammad Iqbal (PLD 2012 SC 760) and Qasim Ali Vs. Rehmatullah (2005 SCMR 1926), the Court held that public notice requirements under Section 31 do not extend or alter the limitation period.

The limitation period for pre-emption suits is governed strictly by Section 30, which provides a four-month period from the date of mutation attestation. The Section 30(d), which allows limitation to commence from the date of knowledge, applies only when none of the preceding clauses (a, b, or c) are applicable. The Court reiterated the binding nature of Supreme Court of Pakistan judgments under Article 189 of the Constitution, emphasizing that lower Court judgments conflicting with Supreme Court of Pakistan decisions carry no legal weight.

Mr. Justice Mirza Viqas Rauf highlighted that both the Trial and Appellate Courts had delivered concurrent findings against the Petitioner, and no jurisdictional error or material irregularity was identified to warrant interference under Section 115 of the C.P.C. Revisional powers, he noted, are limited and cannot be invoked merely to re-evaluate evidence or factual findings.

The Petition was dismissed in limine as the Court found no merit in the Petitioner’s case. The judgment reinforces the strict application of limitation laws in pre-emption cases and clarifies the independence of Sections 30 and 31 of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991.