2024 S C M R 430
[Supreme Court of Pakistan]
Present: Ijaz Ul Ahsan, Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Muhammad Ali Mazhar, JJ
AMANULLAH---Appellant
Versus
MUHAMMAD SHAREEF KHAN---Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 179 of 2016, decided on 31st October, 2023.
(On appeal from the judgment dated 12.11.2015 passed by the Peshawar High Court, D.I. Khan Bench in C.R. No.165-D of 2014)
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pre-emption Act (X of 1987)---
----S. 13(3)---Suit for possession through pre-emption---Talb-i-ishhad, notice of---Format---Notice of Talb-i-ishhad tendered on a printed specimen/form, with blank columns filled by the petition writer---Invalid---Tendering of the notice of Talb-i-ishhad through a printed format/pro forma does not fulfill the conditions laid down under section 13 of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pre-emption Act, 1987.
In this case, admittedly, the notice of Talb-i-ishhad was tendered on a printed form containing stereotyped and generalized text with different columns for land, house, and shops, allowing the pre-emptor or petition writer, as the case may be, to simply erase/cut out the inapplicable terms and fill in the blanks. This ready-made format does not fulfill the purpose of a statutory notice and the court cannot countenance the use of such pro form as which every pre-emptor can simply purchase from a vendor, shop/stall, or petition writer who, for his own convenience, gets the template for the notice printed in advance and utilizes stereotyped text in all cases by simply filling in the blank spaces for the pre-emptor to sign and send. Such a notice does not provide any classification of the pre-emptory rights and fails to convey a confirmation of the intention to press the demand of pre-emption. The purpose of a notice under the law is to convey all the necessary particulars, specifically and with a proper application of mind, on a case to case basis, in a customized/personalized form, or in the vein of a tailor-made notice rather than a ready-made notice in which the mixing or merging of irrelevant or general text with the relevant information cannot be avoided. Therefore, a notice on a printed pro forma cannot be considered a valid notice in accordance with the tenets and dictates of the law and the same should be drafted especially and individually for each particular case on its own facts and circumstances. The notice should not be a published template of the petition writer who in the present case was either not capable of drafting a custom-made or customized notice or, due to sluggishness or laziness, wrongly advised the appellant (pre-emptor) to send notice in the template form. In this regard the appellant is also equally responsible for depending solely on the petition writer. Further, the argument of the counsel for the appellant, that the aforesaid lapses should be excused as the appellant was an illiterate man, is without force. Even if the appellant was an illiterate man, as contended, he was well-aware of his right of pre-emption and the requirement of tendering talbs, hence he should also have been aware of the proper manner for performing the same and, if there was any ambiguity in his mind, he could have sought proper legal advice or assistance to structure his case of pre-emption without any legal defect and lacuna. Appeal filed by pre-emptor was dismissed.
Syed Mastan Ali Zaidi, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant.
Syed Abid Hussain Shah, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent.
Comments
Post a Comment