Case Details

Citation(s)
2016 SLG 2222 2016 SLD 2222 2016 YLR 811
Peshawar High Court
Civil Revision No. 3-B of 2012, decided & hearing on 18-08-2015.
MUHAMMAD YOUNIS THAHEEM, JUSTICE
H. Riaz Muhammad Khan and Bashir-ur-Rehman Burki for Petitioner. H.M. Hanif for
Respondent.

FEROZ KHAN

VS

. MST. MALIK ZARO

Law:

Section:

(a) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pre-emption (X of 1987)--- ----S. 13----Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 85 & 92---Talbs, performance of---Proof---Date of notice of Talb-e-Ishhad not mentioned in plaint---Effect---Plaintiff filed suit for possession through pre-emption which was dismissed by Trial Court; whereas, appellate court decreed the same---Validity---Plaintiff although had mentioned details of date, time and place of performance of Talb-e-Muwathibat in her plaint, but she had not disclosed date of notice of Talb-e-Ishhad---Plaintiff, while deposing, had not disclosed date, year and place of performance of Talb-e-Muwathibat and date of sending notice of Talb-e-Ishhad---Plaintiff witnesses, including the informer, had also failed to mention date of performance of Talb-e-Muwathibat and date of notice of Talb-e-Ishhad in their statements---Delivery clerk, who appeared as plaintiff witness to prove delivery of notice of Talb-e-Ishhad, had deposed that when he visited spot for delivery of envelop, he was told that defendant-vendee had left for Japan, so original envelop along with Acknowledgement Due was returned to plaintiff---Defendant-vendee at relevant date and time was out of country as per record produced during trial without any objection as to its admissibility or otherwise---Plaintiff and her witnesses alleged that defendant-vendee had refused to accept plaintiff's claim; whereas defendant-vendee was not present in the country at that time and date---Plaintiff and her witnesses were, therefore, not truthful---Plaintiff's assertions as to performance of Talb-e-Muwathibat was made up story---Two mutations had been attested and plaintiff had made Talb-e-Muwathibat regarding both mutations---Plaintiff had not mentioned in each suit as to for which of said two sale mutations she had made Talb-e-Muwathibat---Plaintiff was also legally bound to prove performance of Talbs through cogent and trustworthy evidence---Plaintiff had failed to prove performance of Talb-e-Muwathibat and Talb-e-Ishhad in accordance with S. 13 of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pre-emption Act, 1987---Appellate court had not reappraised evidence available on file in its true perspective---Impugned…
🔒
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