Case Details

Citation(s)
2023 SLG 1424 2023 SLD 1424 2023 SCMR 1171
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 670 of 2018, decided on 4th January, 2022.Date of hearing: 4th January, 2022. (Against the order Dated 5.4.2018 passed by the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench in C.R. No. 652 of 2011/BWP)
Present: Ijaz ul Ahsan, Sajjad Ali Shah and Munib Akhtar, JJ
Barrister Umar Aslam, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants. A.R. Aurangzeb, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent.

ASHIQ MUHAMMAD and others-----Appellants

VS

Mst. SUHAGAN-----Respondent

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 39,42

Law: Limitation Act, 1908

Section: 3

(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-----Ss. 39 & 42---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 3---Suit for declaration and cancellation of mutation entries--- Limitation---Respondent/plaintiff had challenged mutation entries of the years 1959 and 1966 through a suit filed in 1996, and admittedly being out of possession had to justify such delay---Though in the plaint, the respondent had asserted that she had come to know about the impugned entries a year before filing the suit, however, neither the respondent nor her witnesses in their depositions uttered a single word to justify this inordinate delay in filing the suit---Consequently, the suit itself was hopelessly barred by time---Appeal was allowed. Muhammad Sharif v. MCB Bank Limited 2021 SCMR 1158 ref. (b) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-----Ss. 39 & 42---Suit for declaration and cancellation of mutation entries---Oral lease (mustajri)---Proof---Respondent/plaintiff had set up a case that she had leased out the subject property to the appellant through an oral lease (mustajri) agreement and the lease money was being paid to her regularly---However, she admitted in her cross examination that she had no proof or receipt to show that any lease (mustajri) money was ever paid by the appellant---Evidence produced by the respondent to prove that the subject land was given to appellant on lease (mustajri) did not inspire confidence as the respondent in her deposition very categorically asserted that she herself entered into a lease (mustajri) agreement with the respondent and that there were no witnesses of lease whereas one of her witnesses in his cross examination stated that the terms of lease (mustajri) agreement were settled in his as well as his brother's presence---Suit filed by respondent was rightly dismissed---Appeal was allowed. ORDER SAJJAD ALI SHAH, J.---The Appellants have called in question the judgment of the Lahore High Court in Civil Revision No.652 of 2011/BWP whereby the said Court while reversing the concurrent findings of the two Courts below decreed the suit of the respondents. 2. Briefly, the respondent in the year 2010 filed a suit seeking cancellation of mutation entries numbers 442,…
🔒
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