Case Details

Citation(s)
2012 SLG 2367 2012 SLD 2367 2012 YLR 1454
Balochistan High Court
Civil Revision No. 27 of 2006, decided on 2nd March, 2012.DATE of hearing: 3rd October, 2011
MRS. SYEDA TAHIRA SAFDAR, J
Habib Tahir for Petitioners

BIBI SAKINA and 7 othersvsHaji ASMATULLAH and 2 others

Law:

Section:

(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 39---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Arts. 91 & 114---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 117---Suit for cancellation of mutation and sale agreement filed beyond three years---Burden of proof---Time would be counted from date on which plaintiff get knowledge about the suit documents---Initial burden would lie on plaintiff to establish that he did not know about suit documents earlier and he approached the court within prescribed period after getting knowledge thereof. (b) Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)--- ----Ss. 44 & 47---Joint property, transfer of---Scope---Any co-owner could transfer his whole or part of his share in joint property before its actual partition. (c) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 39---Contract Act (IX of 1872), Ss.15 & 16---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. VI, R. 4---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 117 & 118---Suit for cancellation of mutation entry and sale agreement---Plaintiff's plea that such entry and agreement was result of fraud, coercion and undue influence---Burden of proof---Plaintiff would be bound to prove such plea by leading evidence to the effect that defendant was in a position to dominate his will and advanced to him, threats---Plaint and evidence led by plaintiff did not disclose method through which plaintiff was threatened or put under influence for purpose of effecting suit mutation in revenue record---Suit was dismissed, in circumstances. JUDGMENT MRS. SYEDA TAHIRA SAFDAR, J.---Feeling aggrieved of the judgment dated 29th September, 2004 of Civil Judge-V, Quetta, whereby the suit filed by the petitioner was dismissed, and the judgment dated 26th October, 2005 of Additional District Judge-II, Quetta, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioners also met with the same fate, instant petition has been filed assailing both the judgments with the prayer for setting aside of the same, and allowing the suit filed by them. It was contention of the petitioners that the courts below misappreciated the evidence, and the material on record, thus arrived to a conclusion, which is contrary to law and justice. It was further contended that the…
🔒
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