| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2015 SLG 2292 2015 SLD 2292 2015 CLC 719 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 3342 of 2014, decided on 28th October, 2014.
ABDUS SATTAR ASGHAR, J
Ch. Muhammad Yaqoob Sindhoo for Petitioner
Civil Revision No. 3342 of 2014, decided on 28th October, 2014.
ABDUS SATTAR ASGHAR, J
Ch. Muhammad Yaqoob Sindhoo for Petitioner
MUHAMMAD ASGHAR and others
VS
HAKAM BIBI through L.Rs. and others
Law:
Section:
(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 42---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Art.120---Suit for declaration---Limitation---Oral gift in favour of nephew---Ingredients of valid gift---Factum of valid gift---Scope---Contention of plaintiff was that she was owner in possession of suit land and impugned gift in favour of her nephew was based on fraud, forgery and was ineffective against her rights---Suit was decreed concurrently---Validity---No time, date or place with regard to offer of gift, its acceptance or delivery of possession was mentioned in the written statement or in the testimony of witnesses of defendants---Even no date of offer of gift, its acceptance or delivery of possession by the donor to the donee had been mentioned in the Rapt Roznamcha Waqiati---Defendants being beneficiaries of alleged gift were bound to establish ingredients of a valid gift---Defendants had also failed to mention in the written statement the name of any person/witness before whom donor had orally gifted out property in favour of donee before reporting factum of oral gift to the patwari halqa---Witnesses of Roznamcha Waqiati had not uttered even a single word with regard to already completion of factum of gift before reporting the said event to the patwari halqa---Defendants had failed to adduce any reliable ocular or documentary evidence to establish a valid oral gift by the donor in favour of donee before reporting the alleged factum of gift to the patwari halqa---Rapt Roznamcha Waqiati could not be termed as sufficient evidence to establish the impugned factum of a valid gift---Part Sarkar of impugned mutation was not available in the revenue record---Donees had produced only a photo copy of Part Sarkar which did not contain the thumb-impressions of donor or Pattidar or Lumberdar concerned---Revenue officer who allegedly attested the impugned mutation was not examined---Defendants were required to get the thumb impressions of donor and her son verified with their admitted thumb impressions---Alleged donor was an old illiterate lady having two sons at the time of alleged gift---Nothing was on record as to what services had been rendered to the donee by the donor to gift…
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