Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 1196 2021 SLD 1196 2021 CLC 2062
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 123 of 2013, heard on 16th June, 2021, Date of hearing: 16th June, 2021.
SULTAN TANVIR AHMAD, JUSTICE
Muhammad Ehsan Gondal for Petitioner. Ch. Saifullah Warraich for
Respondent.

AHMAD KHAN

VS

MUHAMMAD AZAM

Law: Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1967

Section: 42

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 17,79

(a) Punjab Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967)--- ----S.42---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 17 79---Suit for specific performance---Attestation of mutation---Non-availability of witnesses during attestation of mutation---Scope filed suit for specific performance claiming therein that the suit property was purchased by him vide oral agreement; that the mutation was entered in the Rapt Roznamcha Waqiati (daily diary) in presence of witnesses and that the defendant had got the mutation cancelled in collusion with the revenue department---Trial Court and Appellate Court concurrently decreed the suit---Validity---Section 42 of Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1967, reflected that unless the mutation was of inheritance or it was followed by a registered deed or it was under an order of the Court, the same was required to be attested in presence of that person whose right was acquired and it was necessary that such person was identified by two responsible persons preferably Lambardar, Member Union Committee, Union Council or Town Committee---Signatures or thumb impressions of the aforesaid two persons should have been obtained by the Revenue Officer---In the absence of fulfillment of such requirement of law, the factum of entry in the record did not carry any presumption of truth---Mere entry in the diary or relevant page of the diary was not a primary evidence---Names of witnesses were not disclosed in the plaint during his examination-in-chief had not uttered a word regarding the place, time and manner of the oral agreement---Not only the case was attempted to be improved after the plaint, in fact none of the statements of witnesses was in harmony with the others---Oral agreement could not be proved by the plaintiff as per Arts. 17 and 79 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984---Judgments passed by courts below were set aside and the suit was dismissed---Revision petition was allowed, in circumstances. Karamdad v. Manzoor Ahmad and 2 others 2015 CLC 157; Bashir Ahmad and others v. Abdul Latif and others 2005 YLR 2655; Mst. Nooran Mai and another v. Ahmad Bukhsh and 3 others 2006 YLR 1039; Mst. Rashida Abdul Rehman v. Zahoor Hussain and 5 others 2007 CLC 1372; Tariq Javed and 11 others…
🔒
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