Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 42,39,54

Law: Transfer of Property Act, 1882

Section: 58

Law: Limitation Act, 1908

Section: 91

(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss. 42, 39 54---Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), S. 58---Suit for declaration, cancellation and injunction---Transfer of mortgaged property---Scope---Applicant filed a suit for declaration, cancellation and injunction with the claim that his property had been transferred by private respondent through fraudulent means---Trial Court and Appellate Court concurrently dismissed the suit---Validity---Applicant had challenged the sale deed, allegedly executed by him, by asserting that he never executed the same and claimed that the same was a fabricated document---By producing evidence on oath, which evidence was in line with his pleadings, the applicant had discharged his burden whereafter the burden had shifted upon private respondent to prove the contrary---However, the private respondent admittedly never appeared before the Trial Court to dispute the allegations made by the applicant or to controvert the statements made on oath by his witnesses, nor did he produce any evidence of his own---Suit property was lying mortgaged with the bank at the relevant time---Revision petition was allowed, and the suit was decreed as prayed for. Abdul Rashid v Muhammad Yasin and another 2010 SCMR 1871 ref. (b) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss. 42, 39 54---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Art. 91---Suit for declaration, cancellation and injunction---Limitation---Plaintiffs evidence qua date of knowledge remaining unrebutted---Effect---Sale deed executed and registered in the year 1997 was challenged by the plaintiff thirteen years later, and consequently, the suit was declared to be barred under Art. 91 of the Limitation Act, 1908---High Court observed that the lower courts, in their analysis, failed to acknowledge the plaintiffs pleadings and evidence concerning the date of his knowledge regarding defendants claim of title over the suit property based on the disputed sale deed----Plaintiff had claimed that he became aware of the sale deed only a week prior to filing the suit, when defendant attempted to dispossess him from the property---Importantly, these facts presented by the plaintiff remained unchallenged and…

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