| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1972 SLG 260 1972 SLD 260 1972 SCMR 433 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 202 of 1972, decision dated: 26th October 1972
HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C.J. AND ANWARUL HAQ, J
Ch. Hafeez Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Maqbool Ahmad, Advocate -on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 202 of 1972, decision dated: 26th October 1972
HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C.J. AND ANWARUL HAQ, J
Ch. Hafeez Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Maqbool Ahmad, Advocate -on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.
MUHAMMAD GHAUS
VS
MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM AND another--Respondents
Law:
Section:
Custom (Punjab)-Sale of ancestral land challenged by reversioner as having been made without consideration and legal necessity Vendor "a complete physical wreck and his naivety bordering on stupidity"-Mere endorsement on deed by Sub-Registrar as to the passing of consideration money, in circumstances not sufficient---More evidence necessitated to establish actual receipt of consideration-Lands sold for purchasing land at a place 200 miles away, physical infirmity of vendor not permitting him to look after such lands-Vendor also found to have sold .so arc land preciously to same purchasers and such sale set aside after civil litigation-Sale, held, rightly set aside as being without legal necessity and adequate consideration. JUDGMENT HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C. J.-This is a petition for special leave to appeal from the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court dismissing a second appeal. This second appeal arose out of a suit filed for a declaration that the sale in favour of the petitioner by the respondent No. 2 herein of 21 kanals and 13 marlas of land situated in village Sujowali, Tehsil Pasrur, by a registered sale deed dated the 8th of January 1958, was void, as it was without any consideration and without legal necessity and the vendor was governed by custom The suit was filed by the brother of the vendor who claimed to by his reversioner. All the Courts below have found that the property was ancestral property qua the respondent herein and his brother, that they were governed by custom, that the sale was without legal necessity, and that payment of consideration had been proved only to the extent of Rs.1,451 as against the consideration of Rs. 4,000 mentioned in the deed. In second appeal, the learned Judge in the High Court felt himself bound by the concurrent findings of fact of the Courts below which also appeared to him to have been arrived at correctly after an exhaustive review of the entire evidence on record. The vendee has now come up for special leave to appeal, and it is contended on his behalf that the finding as to the absence of legal necessity is based on non-consideration of material evidence relating to the fact that the…
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