Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 42,39,54

Law: Land Revenue Act, 1967 (XVII of 1967)

Section: 52

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 115

Specific Relief Act, 1877 (I of 1877)-- ----Ss. 42, 39 ,  54--Suit for declaration cancellation of mutation and permanent injection--Dismissal of suit--Gift mutation No. 1 was minor at time of gift--Invalidity of gift--Non-delivery of possession--Inherited property--Evidentiary value--It is settled principle of law that who alleged something must prove same through reliable, confidence inspiring and trustworthy evidence--Mere allegation of fraud without proof cannot absolve them from proving allegation of fraud--Gift would not be invalid in favour of minor if physical possession had not been givens admitted that their father died in year 1990--The record transpires that father of petitioners was alive at time of gift to donee--He never challenged gift in his lifetime--It could not be acceptable minor had mutated suit property fraudulently with collusion--How revenue authority had transferred suit property in name of minor without consent of father of petitioners--Revision petition dismissed. Land Revenue Act, 1967 (XVII of 1967)-- ----S. 52--Presumption of truth--U/s. 52 of Land Revenue Act 1967 presumption of truth attached with record of rights--Rebuttal of long standing entries requires strong evidence. 2002 YLR 2338 ref. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908)-- ----S. 115--Revisional jurisdiction--Revisional jurisdiction of High Court is limited--Exercising revisional jurisdiction High Court is not permitted to re-open or dilate upon merit of case unless and until grave injustice or illegality is proved on record. 2010 SCMR 5 ref. JUDGMENT The petitioners/plaintiffs questioned judgments and decrees dated 30th June, 2016 and 30th November, 2019 (impugned judgments and decrees) passed by Civil Judge-VIII, Quetta and Additional District Judge, Kuchlak (trial and appellate Court), whereby the suit of the petitioners/plaintiffs was dismissed and the appeal filed was also dismissed. 2. Precise facts of the case are that the petitioners/plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration, cancellation of mutation Entry No. 128 and permanent injunction against the respondents/defendants in the Court of Civil Judge-VIII, Quetta, contending therein that the father of the…

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