Court’s Duty in Framing Issues and Pre-Emption Rights

Panel: Riaz Ahmad, J.

This case, Civil Revision No. 2077-D of 1986, decided on November 10, 1986, involved Muhammad Saeed as the Petitioner against Muhammad Urfan and another as Respondents. The primary issues addressed were the duty of the court in framing issues and the application of pre-emption rights. The court emphasized that the refusal to frame issues amounts to a “case decided” and is amenable to revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code. It is the court’s duty to apply its mind and understand the facts before framing issues. While the court is bound to frame issues, it is also incumbent upon the parties to move the court to get any omitted issues framed. The court cited several precedents to support its stance on the importance of issue framing and its revisional powers.

The case also touched upon the superior right of pre-emption. The court found that Mst. Parveen Akhtar, as the paternal aunt, had in good faith attempted to secure the property for her minor nephew, Muhammad Urfan, and thus the suit was not “Benami” (fictitious). It was concluded that Muhammad Urfan, being the minor defendant, had a superior right of pre-emption under Section 15 of the Pre-emption Act due to his right to inherit his father’s property. The decree was modified to stipulate that if the minor defendant, Irfan, did not deposit the sale price, the suit would then be decreed in favor of respondent No. 2, the rival pre-emptor, which the court deemed in accordance with law. For the reasons stated, the revision petition was dismissed.

Download PDF