| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 1915 2026 SLD 1915 = 2026 CLC 188 |
Lahore High Court
R.F.A. No. 80638 of 2021, heard on 23rd October, 2023.
Presented By: Before Shahid Bilal Hassan and Rasaal Hasan Syed, JJ
Ch. Muhammad Gulnawaz Goraya for Appellant. Tahrim Iqbal Butt, Assistant Advocate General with Naveed Haider, Assistant Commissioner, Muhammad Safdar Rana, Naib Tehsildar and Khurshid Ahmad Patwari Halqa, Gujranwala for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 3, 11 and 12. Syed Muhammad Usman Tirmazi for
Respondents Nos. 4 to 8 and 10. Ex parte for
Respondents Nos. 9 and 13 to 16.
R.F.A. No. 80638 of 2021, heard on 23rd October, 2023.
Presented By: Before Shahid Bilal Hassan and Rasaal Hasan Syed, JJ
Ch. Muhammad Gulnawaz Goraya for Appellant. Tahrim Iqbal Butt, Assistant Advocate General with Naveed Haider, Assistant Commissioner, Muhammad Safdar Rana, Naib Tehsildar and Khurshid Ahmad Patwari Halqa, Gujranwala for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 3, 11 and 12. Syed Muhammad Usman Tirmazi for
Respondents Nos. 4 to 8 and 10. Ex parte for
Respondents Nos. 9 and 13 to 16.
UMAR FAROOQ ---Appellant
VERSUS
PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and others ---Respondents
Law: Limitation Act, 1908
Section: IX,1,120
Law: Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)
Section: 8,39,42,54
Law: Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1967
Section: XVII,42(1)
Law: Transfer of Property Act, 1882
Section: IV,54
(a) Limitation Act (IX of 1908)--- ----First Sched., Art. 120---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Ss. 8, 39, 42 & 54--Transactions of mutations---Filing of suit for declaration, cancellation, possession and permanent injunction after 36/40 years---Delay in challenging the transactions/mutations---Plea of knowledge about mutations four months prior to filing the suit---Failure of the appellants to prove such plea---Effect---Dismissal of suit---Validity---All the transactions/mutations, though duly entered in the revenue record from 1971 till the filing of the suit, were not timely challenged--Predecessor of the plaintiffs had been alive for number of years but they did not challenge the transactions particularly mutations in respect of which the suit was filed by the appellants in the year 2020---Under Art. 120 of the Limitation Act, 1908, (Act) a suit to challenge the mutation can be filed within six years from the date of attestation of mutation while the appellants filed the suit after more than 36/40 years from the date of mutations which on the face of it was barred by time--Plea of the appellants that they allegedly acquired knowledge of the mutations under challenge four months before the filing of the suit, the same was belied by the evidence on record---It was evident from the record beyond any doubt that appellants and their predecessors had the knowledge of transactions and mutations right from the beginning but filed the suit after 36/40 years, thus, hadfailed to file suit within six years in terms of Art. 120 of the Act, therefore, the suit was hopelessly barred by time---Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances. Wahid Bakhsh through legal heirs and another v. Ghulam Muhammad through Legal heirs PLD 1990 Lah. 193; Ashiq Muhammad and others v. Mst. Sugran 2023 SCMR 1171; Agha Syed Mushtaque Ali Shah v. Mst. Bibi Gul Jan and others 2016 SCMR 910 and Mst. Rabia Gul and others v. Muhammad Janan and others 2022 SCMR 1009 rel. (b) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss. 8, 39, 42 & 54---Punjab Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), S.42(1)--Transfer of Property Act (V of 1882), S. 54---Transactions of…