Case Details

Citation(s)
2017 SLG 934 2017 SLD 934 2017 PLJ 105
Lahore High Court
C.R. No. 793 of 2016, heard on 4.11.2016. Date of hearing: 4.11.2016.
CH. MUHAMMAD MASOOD, JAHANAGIR, JUSTICE
Mr. Qadeer Ahmed Rana, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. Muhammad Arif Yaqoob Khan, Addl. A.G. for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 4. Mr. Imdad Ali Naikokara, Advocate for
Respondent No. 4.

ZAKA ULLAH

VS

PROVINCE OF PUNJAB, ETC. --RespondentS

Law:

Section:

Land Revenue Act, 1967 (XVII of 1967)-- ----S. 42--Civil Procedure Code, (V of 1908), S. 115--Civil revision--Declaratory suit--Gift--Cancellation of mutation was allowed--Donar was old age ailing person who died within couple of days of attestation of mutation--Beneficiary of mutation and transaction--Validity--It is well established by now that mutation is always sanctioned through summary proceedings and is intended to keep record update for collection of land revenue--Such entries are made in Register under Section 42 of Land Revenue Act, 1967 which attains no presumption of correctness prior to incorporation in Record of Rights--No doubt, that entries in mutation are admissible in evidence in a case, but these require to be proved by person relying upon it independently through affirmative evidence because an oral transaction reflected therein neither confers title in favour of its beneficiary nor can establish same--No doubt, attesting witnesses, and revenue officer, appeared in witness-box and tried to prove attestation of mutation, but exercise was not sufficient, rather beneficiary was independently required to prove transaction which might have been settled prior to attestation of mutation--Muslim is free to transfer his property by making a declaration of gift in favour of any person, but when legal heirs of donor were available--It is settled law that findings on questions of fact or law recorded by Court of competent jurisdiction cannot be interfered with inrevisional jurisdiction unless those findings suffer from jurisdictional defect, illegality or material irregularities--Disputed mutation being result of fraud was got attested by petitioner by playing fraud to deprive ladies and their brother and frivolous litigation based on mala fide as initiated by petitioner, High Court is inclined to direct to take legal action against petitioner or his family members, if they are still enjoying possession of disputed property and after their ejectment, possession should be delivered to respondents without any failure--If any illegal hindrance is created by petitioner or his family members, then through all coercive measures, even by aid of police to be…
🔒
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