| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2014 SLG 1706 2014 SLD 1706 2014 CLC 824 |
Peshawar High Court
Civil Revision No.1125 of 2011, decision dated: 20-09-2013.
IKRAMULLAH KHAN, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Revision No.1125 of 2011, decision dated: 20-09-2013.
IKRAMULLAH KHAN, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Mst. MEHR ANGIZA through L.Rs. and 8 otherss
VS
Mst. KHUSHNOODA BEGUM and 7 others
Law:
Section:
Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-------S. 42---West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), S.42---Suit for declaration---Gift---Pardanasheen lady---Mutation---Burden of proof--- Co-sharer--- Limitation--- Mushaa, doctrine of---Scope---Contention of defendants was that plaintiff had gifted suit land in their favour---Suit was dismissed by the Trial Court but same was decreed by the Appellate Court---Validity---No witness had been produced by the defendants to substantiate their plea of transfer of property in their names---Beneficiaries of mutation were bound to prove the execution of the same with free consent---Defendants had failed to bring on record the required evidence for establishing the factum of acquisition of rights through the impugned mutation---Neither any witness who had recognized the plaintiff in the common assembly nor any document had been produced by the defendants to infer that disputed mutation had been signed and attested by her---Bald statements of witnesses of defendants were insufficient to infer that mutation was executed by the plaintiff---No limitation would run against a co-sharer---Every fresh entry in the periodical record with regard to immovable property would give fresh cause of action---Wrong entries never conferred or deprived a person of his rights in immovable property---Strong, cogent and irrebuttal evidence was required to prove transfer of rights in immovable property and to deprive a person of his rights therein---Burden of proving the transaction would lie on the person who would be beneficiary of such transaction and same never shifted on aggrieved person---Express repudiation and ouster of rights should be proved through high standard of evidence which could not create a single dent in the smooth completion of such transaction which took away the right of pardanasheen lady---Adverse entry and non-participation in the profits of the property would not amount to an ouster of co-sharer---Wrong mutation conferred no right in the property--- Revenue record was maintained only for the purpose of ensuring and realization of land revenue---Alleged gift was not gift in real sense but same was a kind of Mushaa as plaintiff…
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