Law:

Section:

Gift--- ----Proof---Purported gift to deprive mother and sister from their share in inheritance---Alleged donee/appellant, who was the beneficiary of the gift, had to establish it---Neither the gift deed (primary evidence) nor a certified copy thereof (secondary evidence) was produced by the appellant and instead a photocopy of the sub-registrar s register was produced, and on this the appellant s claim of the purported gift was based---Incidentally, neither the sub-registrar nor any officer/official from his office was produced/summoned by the appellant to testify that the photocopy which was produced was a true/certified copy from the said register---Appellant did not produce any tangible evidence of the purported gift, let alone to have established it---On the basis of a document which had no legal significance the appellant sought to deprive his mother and sister of their inheritance---Regarding the gift mutation entry made in the revenue record, if the revenue authority had changed the revenue record on the basis of a photocopy of the register maintained by the sub-registrar, they did not act in accordance with the law; they also did not issue notices to the heirs of to consider any objection that they may have had---Appellant fraudulently deprived the legal heirs of their share in the inheritance and then sought to reinforce the fraud by getting the revenue record changed and this was facilitated by the land revenue authority---In depriving the other legal heirs the appellant acted dishonestly, illegally and violated Qur anic injunctions---Appeal was dismissed with costs throughout and also special costs in the amount of Rs.500,000 (five hundred thousand rupees) imposed on the appellant as the defence taken by him was vexatious and false, with the direction that if costs were not paid the same shall be recovered as arrears of land revenue from the appellant, and till costs were paid they shall continue to constitute a charge on the estate of the appellant. Al-Qur an, Surah An-Nisa (4) verses 11 to 14 and 176 ref. JUDGMENT Qazi Faez Isa, J. The learned counsel for the appellant states that the High Court had allowed the Civil Revision without appreciating…

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