Case Details

Citation(s)
2013 SLG 2757 2013 SLD 2757 2013 YLR 1870
Lahore High Court
Civil Revisions Nos. 3990 and 3775 of 2010, heard on 12th June, 2012
AMIN-UD-DIN KHAN, J
Fakhar-uz-Zaman Akhtar Tarar for Petitioners. Ch. Riaz Ahmad Kataria for
Respondents

AHMAD ALI and others

VS

BASHIR AHMED and others

Law:

Section:

(a) West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967)--- ----Ss.42 & 45---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 117 & 120---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.42---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115---Suit for declaration---Mutation of sale---Attestation---Onus to prove---Plaintiffs claimed that they were owners in possession of suit-land and entries in revenue record had no legal value---Defendants resisted the suit by raising the plea that they had purchased suit-land and revenue record supported their version---Trial Court and Lower Appellate Court concurrently decided the matter in favour of defendants---Validity---Onus to prove valid sale of land in favour of predecessor of defendants was on defendants to prove valid sale and valid attestation of mutation---Compliance of all conditions mentioned in S. 42 of West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967, for valid attestation of mutation were necessary and without strict compliance, the mutation was nullity in the eyes of law---Mutation in question did not create any right or title in suit property in favour of predecessors of defendants and it had also no affect upon the rights of predecessor as well as of plaintiffs---Mutation proceedings were not judicial proceedings and did not at all happen to confer title---Whenever genuineness of any mutation was challenged, burden was squarely on parties relying upon the mutation, to prove actual transaction---High Court declined to close its eyes and validate concurrent findings without application of mind---High Court had to exercise its jurisdiction vested to it under S. 115, C.P.C. and to interfere in illegal findings recorded by courts below, so as to rectify illegality committed by two courts below, when they had ignored basic provisions of law---High Court, in exercise of revisional jurisdiction set aside concur-rent s and decrees passed by two courts below and decreed the suit in favour of plaintiffs---Revision was allowed in circumstances. Qasim Ali v. Sher Muhammad 2007 YLR 1770; Khushi Muhammad and others v. Bashir Ahmad and others 2010 YLR 175; Muhammad Iqbal and another v. Mukhtar Ahmad through L.Rs. 2008 SCMR 855; Wali and 10 others v. Akbar and 5…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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