| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1994 SLD 827 = 1994 CLC 1942 |
Lahore High Court
Regular Second Appeals Nos. 257 and 399 of 1974, heard on 18th December, 1993.
Presented By: Before Munir A. Shaikh, J
Javed Buttar for Appellants. Jari Ullah Khan for
Respondent.
Regular Second Appeals Nos. 257 and 399 of 1974, heard on 18th December, 1993.
Presented By: Before Munir A. Shaikh, J
Javed Buttar for Appellants. Jari Ullah Khan for
Respondent.
ALLAH BAKHSH and others---Appellants
VERSUS
Mst. BHAGAN---Respondent
Law:
Section:
Custom (Punjab)--- ---- West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), S. 42---Succession under custom---Purported condition mentioned in specific column of mutation to the effect that after termination of widow's estate on her death or re-marriage, land in question, would revert to male collaterals of deceased land-owner-- Proof relating to existence of such condition and its validity---Order passed by Revenue Officer sanctioning said mutation did not mention any of such condition---Such condition mentioned in a specific column of mutation had no sanction behind it as the same had not been shown to have been signed by any competent officer---Entry in question, appeared to have been incorporated later on through interpolation and did not have any sanctity behind it---Entry in question, therefore, was unauthorised and did not carry any evidentiary value in circumstances. Custom (Punjab)--- ---- West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act (V of 1962), S. 2---Termination of liminted estate---Mode of succession---After death of limited owner, property in question would revert to original owner/allottee and was to be inherited lie his heirs. Muhammadan Law--- ----Sect---Presumption relating to sect of deceased---Every Muslim was presumed to be Sunni by faith unless it was proved through cogent evidence that he was a Shia. Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 100---Concurrent finding of fact could be assailed only if the same had been shown to have suffered from a misapprehension or was condemnable on any of the grounds mentioned in S. 100, C.P.C: -Finding of fact did not appear to have been either misread or misconstrued so as to justify interference in second appeal. Javed Buttar for Appellants. Jari Ullah Khan for Respondent. Date of hearing: 18th December, 1993. JUDGMENT This judgment will also dispose of R.SA. No. 399 of 1974 as both the appeals have been filed against the same judgment passed by the lower appellate Court. The dispute relates to land measuring 109 Kanals 4 Marlas comprising western part of Square No. 51 situated in Village 265/G.B, Tehsil T.T. Singh, District Faisalabad. The facts of the case shortly stated are…