Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 39,42,54

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 39,42,54

Law: Registration Act, 1908

Section: 17

(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-------Ss. 39, 42 & 54---Registration Act (XVI of 1908), S.17---Cancellation of document, declaration and injunction---Registered document---Presumption---Concurrent findings of fact---Plaintiff alleged that registered sale-deed in question was result of fraud---Validity---Plaintiff failed to produce any evidence, therefore, both the courts below were justified to give weight to registered sale-deed having been signed and executed before Sub-Registrar---Under law, registered document always attached to its sanctity and in rebuttal strong evidence was required to cast doubt on genuineness of registered document---Plaintiff neither denied signatures on registered sale-deed nor alleged any coercion by defendant---Regarding payment of sale consideration, contents of registered document were presumed to be correct---In registered sale-deed there were clear recitals about receipt of sale consideration by plaintiff---Once document was registered then executant could not wriggle out of its binding effect---No one, under law, could be allowed to approbate, reprobate or otherwise, blow hot and cold in one breath---Registered sale-deed was signed, therefore, plaintiff could not allege coercion or illegal means and stamp paper was purchased prior to registration of sale-deed---High Court declined to interfere in concurrent findings of fact by two courts below---Revision was dismissed in circumstances. Sughran Bibi v. Aziz Begum and 4 others 1996 SCMR 137; Choudhry Ghulam Rasool v. Mrs. Nusrat Rasool 2008 SCMR 146 and Syed Ahmad through special attorney v. Muzafar Hussain through L.Rs. 2008 CLC 175 distingushed. Wazeer Khoso v. Province of Sindh, through Secretary Board of Revenue and others PLD 2005 Kar. 43 and Mst. Naseem v. Shahla Durani 2010 CLC 1861 rel. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 115---Revisional jurisdiction of High Court---Substituting finding of fact---Scope---Such power under S.115, C.P.C. is primarily intended for correcting errors having been made and/or committed by subordinate court in exercise of its jurisdiction---While exercising jurisdiction under the provision of S.115, C.P.C. court cannot interfere…

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