Law: Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1967

Section: 42

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 117

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.II,R.2,115

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 42

(a) Punjab Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967)---S. 42---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 42---Suit for declaration---Dispute over authenticity of a mutation document---Impugned document of mutation mentioned the name, signature and Identity Card (ID) numbers of the respondent as vendor and the petitioner as vendee---Signature and ID card number of marginal witness as well as the identifying Lambardar were also mentioned therein, while the Naib Tehsildar attested the mutation---In evidence Lambardar who identified the parties before the Revenue Officer recorded his statement---Patwari produced the record and also confirmed the factum of entry of relevant Rapt Number by the then Patwari---Revenue Officer also confirmed and verified the physical appearance of the parties before him including the identification of parities by the Lambardar and appearance of Pattidar; he also testified that the respondent/plaintiff admitted before him the sale transaction, receipt of sale consideration and alienation in favour of petitioner/defendant---Testimony of respondent/plaintiff was based on falsehood and deceptiveness---On one hand he deposed that at the relevant time when the impugned mutation was recorded or attested he was bed ridden due to a leg fracture, hence his personal appearance before the Officers of Revenue Authority was not possible for signing the document, while on the same date another mutation was recorded duly signed by him which was never challenged by him and he failed to dispute said mutation recorded on the same date without any plea of hospitalization or being bed ridden on account of leg fracture---No proof of his indisposition was produced on record along with medical record or otherwise---According to respondent/ plaintiff, Revenue Officers defrauded him but he failed to mention as to what legal action was taken by him against the said Revenue Officers---At the time of institution of suit, he claimed to be in possession but he failed to prove his possession while the petitioner/defendant discharged his burden of proof---Section 42 of Specific Relief Act, 1877 expressly permitted the plaintiff to ask for further relief but in the present case neither…

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