Law: Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)

Section: 42

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

Section: 79,100,117

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 11,115

Law: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, (VI of 1935)

Section: 3(2)

(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S.42---Qanun-e-Shahdat (10 of 1984), Arts. 79 & 117---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115---Inheritance dispute---Gift, essential ingredients of---Female legal heir claiming her Shari share in properties of her late father by filing suit for declaration---Brothers relying on a purported gift deed---Gift deed, execution of--Burden of proof---Scope---Burden is upon the brothers who rely upon the gift deed to the detriment of the sisters to prove the validity and authenticity of the gift deed--Petitioner filed a civil suit seeking declaration of ownership and her Shari share in certain properties inherited from her late father---She claimed that after her father s death, his three sons and three daughters, including the petitioner, became legal heirs---Some of the legal heirs allegedly sold portions of the inherited property through disputed transactions to third parties---The Trial Court decreed the suit in her favour but in appeal the district court set aside that judgment and dismissed the suit, leading to the present revision petitions before the High Court---Held: It was clear from the perusal of alleged tamleek that it contained three thumb impressions but this document did not identify the individuals to whom such thumb impressions belonged to---Moreover, original document of tamleek was not produced before the court during evidence and nor was it mentioned in the pleadings that original tamleek was missing---Therefore, tamleek in favor of respondents/defendants was suspicious and unreliable---In the present case, the gift deed was not proved in view of the requirements of Qanun-e-Shahdat, 1984 and the respondents/defendants had not discharged the burden---Respondents/brothers were not able to establish the essential ingredients of gift/tamleek i.e. offer, acceptance and delivery of possession which was fatal to their case---Moreover, the question of limitation was raised by the respondents, therefore, the burden was upon them to prove that the suit was time-barred---However, there was no evidence on record from the side of the respondents/defendants to establish that the petitioner ever acquiesced to or…