| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 475 2021 SLD 475 2021 PLJ 62 |
Quetta High Court
C.R. No. 120 of 2016, decided on 27.8.2019, Date of hearing: 23.8.2019.
ABDUL HAMEED BALOCH, , JUSTICE
Mr. Ghulam Mohyuddin Sasoli, Advocate for Petitioners. Mr. Habibullah Nasar, Advocate for
Respondents. Mr. Shahid Baloch, Additional Advocate General for State.
C.R. No. 120 of 2016, decided on 27.8.2019, Date of hearing: 23.8.2019.
ABDUL HAMEED BALOCH, , JUSTICE
Mr. Ghulam Mohyuddin Sasoli, Advocate for Petitioners. Mr. Habibullah Nasar, Advocate for
Respondents. Mr. Shahid Baloch, Additional Advocate General for State.
SABZAL KHAN AND 9 OTHERS
VS
MUHAMMAD AKBAR AND 10 OTHERS
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 115
Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877
Section: 42
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908)-- ----S. 115--Specific Relief Act, (I of 1877), S. 42--Suit for declaration--Dismissed--Appeal--Partly allowed--Self cultivation--Possessive owners--Unsettled land--Filing of complaint--Dismissed--Completion of mutation process--Failing to prove ownership--Challenge to--Mutation was carried out in presence of petitioners at that time petitioners neither raised any objection nor claimed for unsettled land--It means petitioners accepted mutation without any objection s filed instant suit for declaration, cancellation and correction of mutation after more than 50 years of mutation--Record transpired that petitioners had knowledge of mutation, but did not file any application before revenue forum nor file any suit before competent Court of jurisdiction--Aggrieved party has to pursue his legal remedy with diligent and has to explain delay of each days s failed to produce any cogent oral as well as documentary evidence with regard to such long delay s claimed suit property is still in their possession they are cultivating it--There exists contradicted evidence of petitioners/plaintiffs s failed to prove their ownership of suit land--It is well settled principle of law plaintiffs are bound to prove his case on basis of their own evidence they did not take benefit of short coming of respondents--Evidence of petitioners/plaintiffs is not such standard on reliance can be placed s claimed ownership of unsettled land on basis of possession of heavy burden lies on Petitioners to prove their ownership and to prove strong cogent evidence--Presumption of ownership of forests and wastelands shall be held and to belong to Government--Petition was dismissed. [Pp. 66 67] A, C, D F PLD 2016 Bal. 44 ref. Limitation Act, 1908 (IX of 1908)-- ----Art. 120--Limitation for declaratory suit--Article 120 of Limitation Act (IX of 1908) providing of limitation for filing declaratory suit is six years. …
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