Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 42,54

Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-------Ss. 42 & 54---Suit for declaration and injunction---Mutation of sale---Plea of abduction and coercion raised by plaintiff---Not proved---Respondent/plaintiff assailed sale mutation attested in favour of appellant/defendant on the plea that the same was a result of coercion while keeping him in illegal confinement---Suit was decreed by Trial Court in favour of respondent/plaintiff, whereas appeal and revision filed by appellant / defendant were dismissed by Lower Appellate Court and High Court respectively---Validity---Upon filing of suit and after that making a statement before Court on oath that he/she has not made the transaction and the instrument, the onus to prove such instrument shifts and the beneficiary must prove the transaction as well as valid registration/attestation of document---Respondent/plaintiff was a grown-up married person having a daughter, who pleaded that he was abducted by appellant/defendant who kept him in abduction for 4-5 days and got mutation in question attested and denied transaction of sale in favour of appellant/defendant---It was prime duty of respondent/plaintiff to prove the case pleaded by him but he failed to prove the same---Appellant /defendant produced Patwari as well as revenue officials in the court as witnesses, who had attested mutation in question and they fully supported the entrance and attestation of mutation---Supreme Court set aside judgments and decrees passed by three Courts below and dismissed the suit filed by respondent/plaintiff---Appeal was allowed.Ghulam Ali v. Akbar alias Akoor PLD 1991 SC 957 ref.ORDER:AMIN-UD-DIN KHAN, JUSTICE:---.---Through this petition filed under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, petitioner has challenged the order of the learned High Court dated 04.02.2021 whereby Civil Revision No. 7582 of 2021 filed by the petitioner was dismissed.2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner on 18.1.2024 we issued notice to the other side. Today learned counsel for the petitioner as well as contesting respondent No.1 are present whereas Respondents Nos. 4 and 5 are in attendance in person.3. Though…