Law:

Section:

(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-----Art. 185(3)--Suit for declaration--Plea that decree passed in 1936 remained unexecuted, not sustained--Report made by Girdawar 30 years back in discharge of his duties showing that possession was handed over to decree-holder, relied upon--No material brought on record to rebut its correctness nor any evidence given that it was doubtful in any way--Finding of High Court affirmed--Leave to appeal refused. (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-----Art. 185(3)--Leave to appeal, grant of--Plea not pressed in High Court not permitted to be raised in support of petition for leave to appeal--Petition dismissed. ORDER MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought from judgment, dated 4-2-1975 of the Lahore High Court whereby petitioners second appeal arising out of a decree passed in favour of respondent No. I in a declaratory land suit, was dismissed. Respondents claim was that notwithstanding, her having a decree with regard to the suit land in 1936, the Revenue record showed the petitioner as owners at the relevant time. Learned counsel for the petitioners has explained that although such a decree was passed in favour of respondent No. 1, nonetheless the Revenue authorities realizing that tine entire land nut teeing the: subject-matter of the suit could not farm part of the decree, therefore, the suit land was shown ire the name of petitioner No. I (the other petitioners are stated to be vendees regarding the suit land at different times). Learned counsel has also contended that petitioners Nos. 2 to 5 being bona fide purchasers for consideration could not be deprived of the land in dispute on the basis of the decree passed in 1936 to which they were not parties. Learned counsel lastly contended that the respondents not being in possession at the time of the filing of the suit, the same could not be fled simply for declaration and further that if it would have been a suit for possession, the question of limitation and other related questions would have arisen and the respondents would have been non-suited. The main contention of the learned counsel relates to the identity of the property. The contention is that the…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492