| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 2397 2016 SLD 2397 2016 PLD 587 |
Lahore High Court
R.S.A. No. 64 of 2008, decided on 25th January, 2016. Datesof hearing: 18th December, 2015 and 25th January, 2016.
CH. MUHAMMAD MASOOD, JAHANGIR, JUSTICE
Sheikh Naveed Shahryar, Humaira Bashir Ch. and Javed Imran Ranjha for Appellants.Abid Hussain Minto for
Respondent No. 1.
R.S.A. No. 64 of 2008, decided on 25th January, 2016. Datesof hearing: 18th December, 2015 and 25th January, 2016.
CH. MUHAMMAD MASOOD, JAHANGIR, JUSTICE
Sheikh Naveed Shahryar, Humaira Bashir Ch. and Javed Imran Ranjha for Appellants.Abid Hussain Minto for
Respondent No. 1.
SARDARA AND ALLAH DITTA THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS AND othersVSMST. BASHIR BEGUM AND another
Law:
Section:
(a) Gift-- ----------Oral gift---------Alleged donor an old illiterate village lady---------Gift in favour of alien---------Requirements---------Gift mutation sanctioned on the basis of consent decree---------Scope---------Non-claiming of consequential relief---------Effect---------Judicial proceedings---------Presumption of truth---------Scope---------Contention of plaintiffs was that gift mutation sanctioned through consent decree was illegal, void and ineffective upon their rights---------Suit was dismissed concurrently---------Validity---------Nothing was on record as to when, where and before whom declaration of gift was made by the donor which was accepted by the donee and possession was delivered in lieu thereof---------Oral gift was permissible but same was required to be proved by production of persuasive and trustworthy evidence---------Trial Court proceeded to decree the suit merely on the basis of conceding written statement as well as conceding statement of donor without taking precautionary measures whether all such proceedings were being conducted without any coercion or misrepresentation on the part of donor-lady---------Consent decree being an agreement between the parties to the lis when brought under challenge was required to be proved by beneficiary through production of convincing and cogent evidence---------Trial Court without issuance of summons to the rival party for any further date of hearing received written statement of defendant-donor and after recording her conceding statement suit was decreed on the same day---------Identification of a lady by the advocate before the court who had not been engaged through execution of power of attorney would have no sanctity in the eye of law---------No other independent advice was available to the donor who was an illiterate and old age folk lady---------Gift mutation for its completion required independent witnesses and identifiers which were not available to the donee in the present case---------Principles. Donee managed to get transferred the suit property through the alleged consent decree. Judicial Officer was required to exercise his jurisdiction while dealing with the case file as provided…