| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 3730 2016 SLD 3730 2016 YLR 1270 |
Sindh High Court
Civil Revision No. 18 of 2013, decided on 27th August, 2015. Date of hearing: 6th August, 2015.
SYED MUHAMMAD FAROOQ SHAH, JUSTICE
Irfan Ahmed Qureshi for Applicants. Syed Ali Anwar Shah for
Respondent No.5.
Civil Revision No. 18 of 2013, decided on 27th August, 2015. Date of hearing: 6th August, 2015.
SYED MUHAMMAD FAROOQ SHAH, JUSTICE
Irfan Ahmed Qureshi for Applicants. Syed Ali Anwar Shah for
Respondent No.5.
NOOR MUHAMMAD AND another--ApplicantS
VS
. 1ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, BADIN AND 4 others
Law:
Section:
(a) Gift----- -----Burden of proof-----Entries in the revenue record-----Evidentiary value-----Inheritance-----Limitation-----Contention of plaintiff was that she had not gifted suit property and impugned gift was false and fabricated-----Suit was dismissed by the Trial Court but same was decreed by the Appellate Court-----Validity-----Neither declaration of donor nor acceptance of donees of gift through document or verbal was on record-----Statement book was neither produced by the donees nor by the revenue authorities-----Exhibiting only entries on record did not 'ipso facto' entitle the donees as owners of suit land through gift deed-----Onus would lie on the person who wanted to establish the genuineness of transfer of property by gift-----Beneficiaries/donees were bound to prove such documents but they had not produced any attesting witness nor scribe of alleged gift-----Revenue officer had not supported the case of donees by not producing the relevant documents on record-----Entries in the record of rights were admissible in evidence but their evidentiary value would depend upon the peculiar facts and circumstances of each case-----No limitation would run in the matters of inheritance-----Alleged donor was illiterate and 'parda' observing lady-----Defendants had failed to prove the genuineness of entries in the revenue record by producing independent, confidence inspiring and cogent evidence-----Plaintiff could not be deprived of her ancestral rights-----Revenue entries itself were not sufficient to confer any right or title in favour of donees-----Donor/ donees were not present at the time of sanctioning of mutations-----No proof was on record with regard to statement of donor in favour of donees-----Presence of a person whose right had been acquired and the identification of such person at least by two respectable persons was inevitable-----Factum of gift had made the same doubtful-----Impugned passed by the Appellate Court was speaking one and was based on correct appreciation of evidence-----Revision was dismissed in circumstances. 2004 SCMR 1502; 2007 SCMR 637; PLD 1990 SC 1; 2005 SCMR 911 and 2000 SCMR 346 rel. (b) Islamic Law-----…
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