Substantive Rights Unaffected by Amendments: High Court Upholds Pre-emption Claim Under Unamended Punjab Pre-emption Act

Share:
bail summon 90 LanBail d Technical Acquittal Penalty Bail Case Transfer Citizen 80 Fines Seals Fertilizer Bail CBI Power Period Services death Law Bail Mortgage Mobile Suicide Minor protection constable Land State Girl documents seniority Claim Life Fees Rice TerminationSuicide Driving Education Family Merit Bank NDPS Costs Examination claim Teacher Regular Acquittal itbp319 job Summon payment law Property bpcl Legal payment 200 Child Abuse land Already pspcl journalist fir v summoning society cheque land officer marriage cheque prima bail act

In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, presided over by Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Alka Sarin, upheld the pre-emption rights of a co-sharer in a land sale, underlining the non-retrospective applicability of the 1995 amendment to the Punjab Pre-emption Act.

Legal Point: The central legal issue revolved around the applicability of the 1995 amendment to the Punjab Pre-emption Act in a pre-emption case and whether it impacts substantive rights retrospectively.

Facts and Issues: The appellant, Habib Ahmed, contested a claim for pre-emption by Abdul Rehman, who alleged a preferential right as a co-sharer in a joint khewat (land record). The primary contention was whether Rehman held co-sharer status at the time of the land sale and the impact of the 1995 legislative amendment on this case.

Court Assessment:

Maintainability of Pre-emption Suit: The High Court referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Shyam Sunder & Anr. V/s Ram Kumar & Anr., emphasizing that amendments to laws do not affect substantive rights retrospectively unless explicitly stated. The Court observed, “where a repeal of provisions of an enactment is followed by fresh legislation…such legislation does not affect substantive or vested rights of the parties unless made retrospective either expressly or by necessary intendment.”

Evidence and Status of Co-sharer: The Trial Court’s finding, based on mutation records, established Abdul Rehman as a co-sharer. The High Court found no evidence to the contrary, confirming that the land had not been partitioned and that Rehman maintained his co-sharer status.

Decision: The appeal by Habib Ahmed was dismissed, with the Court finding no substantial question of law. The judgments and decrees of the lower courts were upheld, recognizing the co-sharer status of Abdul Rehman and the maintainability of the suit for pre-emption under the unamended Punjab Pre-emption Act.

 Date of Decision: March 14, 2024

Habib Ahmed vs. Abdul Rehman @ Dulla and Another

Download Judgment

Share: