Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 2905 2017 SLD 2905 2017 SCMR 1934
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No. 1246-L of 2012, decision & hearing date: 24-08-2017 Against dated 19.04.2012 of Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur, passed in Civil Revision No. 514-D of 2000
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, JUSTICE, IJAZ UL AHSAN, JUSTICE
M. M. A. R. Anjum, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners. Nemo for
Respondents.

NAZIR AHMED DECEASED THROUGH LRS

VS

KARIM BAKHSH (LATE) THROUGH LRS

Law:

Section:

Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Art. 100--- Document more than 30 years old---Presumption of truth---Pre-requisite---Condition precedent for grant of benefit of presumption of truth to a document which was more than 30 years old was that there was no doubt about the valid execution of the same---Where a party to the case alleged such a document to be forged, then onus was on the other party relying on the same to prove execution of the document in accordance with law, as the presumption under Art. 100 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 would not apply. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: IJAZ UL AHSAN, JUSTICE:---.--- The petitioners seek leave to appeal against a of Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur, dated 19.04.2012. Through the impugned , a revision petition (C. R. No.514-D of 2000) filed by the petitioners was dismissed. 2. The brief facts necessary for decision of this lis are that the petitioners filed a suit for declaration on 03.03.1983 claiming to be owners of the suit land measuring 12 kanals which allegedly formed part of the land that their predecessors-in -interest had purchased from those of the Respondents. The suit was based on an agreement to sell allegedly executed on 21.03.1934. It was claimed that a sale deed could not be executed for some reason, however, since the document was more than 30 years old and the petitioners were in possession, a presumption of truth was attached to it. On such basis the petitioners were entitled to a declaration in their favour. 3. The trial Court decreed the suit, vide and decree dated 01.11.1992. However, the appellate Court set aside the decree and a revision petition filed by the petitioners before the High Court met the same fate. Hence, this petition. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that admittedly the document on which the Petitioners' suit was based was more than 30 years old. Therefore, the learned appellate Court as well as the revisional Court erred in law in refusing to give the benefit of a presumption of truth to the Petitioners. He further submits that since a presumption…
🔒
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