Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLG 1890 2026 SLD 1890 = 2026 CLC 141
Sindh High Court, Hyderabad Bench
Civil Revision Application No. 183 of 2013, decided on 19th September, 2025.
Presented By:Before Tasneem Sultana, J
Muhammad Sarwar v. Hashmal Khan PLD 2022 SC 13 rel. M. Saleem Hashmi Qureshi and Zaman Zaib for Applicant. Wali Muhammad Jamari, Additional Advocate General for
Respondents.

NADIR HASSAN ---Applicant

VERSUS

PROVINCE OF SINDH through Secretary and others ---Respondents

Law: Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)

Section: 54

Law: Sindh Land Revenue Act, 1967

Section: XVII,52

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 117

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 115

(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S.54---Sindh Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), S.52---Dispute over land recorded as part of Pinyari Canal since 1953---Plaintiff instituted suit for mandatory and permanent injunction claiming ownership on the basis of gift deed from his mother---Onus to prove---Plaintiff failing to demonstrate title of his mother on the date of gift deed in his favor---Brief facts were that the petitioner instituted a suit for mandatory and permanent injunction in respect of suit land claiming ownership on the basis of a registered gift deed executed by his mother in 1999 and mutation made in his favour in 1999---In 2001, upon seeking certified copies from the Settlement Department, he discovered that parts of his land were recorded as part of the Pinyari Canal since 1953, which he contended was incorrect as his land was never used for canal purposes---The respondent authority maintained that the land had been part of the Pinyari Canal alignment since 1953 and was government property not capable of transfer or gift---Held: Firstly, it was incumbent upon the petitioner/plaintiff to have established the title of the alleged donor as well as the genuineness and validity of the purported gift deed, obligations which he had failed to discharge---Petitioner/plaintiff admittedly had not produced the alleged gift deed and the witnesses---Moreover, he had not approached revenue authorities for correction of record prior to instituting the civil suit---Such admissions were fatal for the petitioner's case---Mere reliance on a mutation as conclusive proof of title was legally untenable---Moreover, it was fatal to petitioner's case, as he failed to demonstrate what title, if any, his mother possessed at the time of execution of the alleged gift deed in his favor---No illegality or material irregularity was found in the impugned judgments and decrees---Present civil revision petition was dismissed, in circumstances. Muhammad Sarwar v. Mumtaz Bibi and others 2020 SCMR 276 and Rehmat Noor v. Zulqarnain 2023 SCMR 1645 rel. (b) Sindh Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967)--- ----S.52---Mutation---Mutation entries are maintained solely for fiscal…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register