| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1996 SLG 1509 1996 SLD 1509 1996 CLC 1588 |
Lahore High Court
CH. MUSHTAQ AHMAD KHAN, J
Abid Hassan Minto for Petitioner. Alamgir for
Respondent
CH. MUSHTAQ AHMAD KHAN, J
Abid Hassan Minto for Petitioner. Alamgir for
Respondent
AMIR HUSSAIN KHOKHAR
VS
Mst. NARGIS KHATOON
Law:
Section:
(a) Benami transaction------- Plot in question about which plaintiff claimed to be the real owner was purchased in the name of defendant through registered sale-deed---Presumption though rebuttable was in favour of defendant that she was real owner thereof--Defendant was admittedly a well to do lady who had invested lacs of rupees in the company owned jointly by plaintiff and defendant alongwith others---Oral evidence produced by plaintiff to the effect that he had invested money for purchase of such plot was not confidence-inspiring--=Absence of defendant at the time of execution of sale-deed had been sufficiently explained by her and it is usual practice in society that females do not appear at the time of execution of sale-deed---Plaintiff being chief executive of the company jointly owned by parties had represented her at the time of execution of sale-deed---Merely because, plaintiff appeared before Sub-Registrar and acted on behalf of defendant would not prove that he was real purchaser and that he made payment of sale price from-his own funds---As for plaintiff's claim to be in possession of plot, same being vacant, possession would follow the title---Even if plot in question, was being used by the company jointly owned by parties, possession would be deemed to be permissible and joint but not exclusive--Plaintiff, therefore, was not in exclusive possession of plot in question---There being no reasonable explanation as to why sale-deed was got executed by plaintiff in the name of defendant without getting any writing from her it could not be said that defendant was merely ostensible owner---Evidence on record had established beyond doubt that defendant was the real purchaser and claim of plaintiff of being real owner was not proved---Trial Court having not applied its mind .to facts and circumstances of case, its decision decreeing suit of plaintiff was rightly set aside by First Appellate Court--Judgment and decree of First Appellate Court was affirmed in circumstances. Mir Haji Khan and 11 others v. Mir AijazAli and 2 others PLD 1981 SC 302.rel. Md. Abdul Majid.and others v. Md. Jainul Abedin and others PLD 1970 Dacca 414; Sh. Muhammad Sharif Uppal…
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