| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2006 SLG 503 2006 SLD 503 2006 PLD 727 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 86 of 2006, decided on 8th June, 2006
SYED ZAHID HUSSAIN, J
Muhammad Younis Bhatti for Petitioner
Civil Revision No. 86 of 2006, decided on 8th June, 2006
SYED ZAHID HUSSAIN, J
Muhammad Younis Bhatti for Petitioner
DOST MUHAMMAD
VS
KHAIR MUHAMMAD and 2 others
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: OrderVII,rule11
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. VII, R.11---Muslim owner of property, right of---Mutation of gift, challenge to---Scope---Provisions of O.VII, R.11, C.P.C.---Object---Plaintiff (son) filed declaratory suit challenging gift of property made by defendant (father) in favour of defendant (son)--Plaintiff contended that defendant father alienated property in favour of defendant son under influence and duress and that previously defendant father had given the same property to plaintiff---Defendants filed application under O.VII, R.11, C.P.C. which was accepted by both the Courts below---Validity---Defendant father had stated on Oath that he transferred property in favour of defendant son of his own free-will and consent and did not act under influence of defendant son---Plaintiff did not avail opportunity to cross-examine defendant father in that regard---Transfer of property by Muslim owner who was vested with all rights to dispose of property during his life time, could not be termed as illegal or contrary to law---Provisions of O.VII, R.11, C.P.C. could be invoked for rejection of plaint so that parties be relieved of vexatious litigation---If on considering plaint and material available on record, Court found that suit was vexatious and without merit, it was to be nipped in the bud at initial stage---Plaint was rightly rejected by Courts below---Petition was dismissed. ORDER SYED ZAHID HUSSAIN, J.---A mutation of Gift No.2307 dated 14-2-2004, by means of which respondent No.1 alienated the property in favour of respondent No.2, his son, was sought to be assailed through a declaratory suit instituted before the trial Court. In that an application for rejection of the plaint was filed by the respondents, which application has been accepted by the Courts below, as a result the present petition has been filed .before this Court. 2. It is contended by the learned counsel that respondent No.1 was under the influence of respondent No.2, who made a gift in favour of the later under such influence and duress and that the property had at one time been given to the petitioner as well which was no more available for further disposition in favour of respondent…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492