| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2010 SLG 2767 = 2010 SLD 2767 = 2010 MLD 978 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 2765 of 2005, decided on 2nd April, 2010.
Presented By: Sh. Azmat Saeed, J
Civil Revision No. 2765 of 2005, decided on 2nd April, 2010.
Presented By: Sh. Azmat Saeed, J
ABDUL REHMAN and 2 others----Petitioners
VERSUS
ZAINAB BIBI---Respondent
Law:
Section:
(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 42---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.59---Transaction of gift disinheriting a pardanashin lady---Suit for declaration challenging the mutation of Gift entered in revenue record transferring suit-land in favour of defendants---Trial Court dismissed the suit while Appellate Court set aside the judgment and decree of the Trial Court---Neither the attesting witnesses nor the Revenue Officer attesting the mutation was produced---Disputed thumb-impression also could not be produced---Effect---Held, in circumstances, it was not safe to rely upon the disputed transaction when the same disinherited a female who had no independent legal advice or the support of her male relatives. (b) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Art. 59---Expert opinion---Scope---Where the Handwriting Expert had noticed some similarities between the admitted thumb-impressions and the thumb-impression on the revenue record but the disputed thumb impression was not available, it was not safe to rely on the report of handwriting expert. (c) Islamic law--- ----Gift---Authenticity of gift transaction---Where disputed gift transaction disinherited a female who had no independent legal advice or the support of her male relatives, transaction in question could not be given effect to. Imran Ahmed Malik for Petitioners. Muhammad Yaqoob Sabir for Respondents. ORDER SH. AZMAT SAEED, J.---Civil Revision 2765 of 2005 calls in question the validity of judgment and decree, dated 30-11-2005, whereby the learned Judge of the First Appellate Court accepted the appeal of the respondent/plaintiff against the judgment and decree, dated 29-10-2002 of the learned Civil Judge Chunian. 2. Brief facts giving rise the filing of the captioned civil revision are that respondent who is sister of the petitioners, and the property in dispute was owned by their father, upon whose demise, apparently a mutation of inheritance was entered into in favour of the parties, and on the same day, mutation of gift was allegedly recorded, whereby, the respondent/sister purportedly gifted her share of the property in favour of the petitioners. Subsequently, the respondent filed a suit for…