Case Details

Citation(s)
2006 SLG 3078 2006 SLD 3078 2006 PLD 576
Sindh High Court
Second Appeals Nos. 3, 4 and Misc. No. 235 of 2006, decided on 31st May, 2006
AZIZULLAH M. MEMON, J
Muhammad Akhtar for Appellant (in both the Appeals). Qazi Majid Ali for
Respondents (in both the Appeals).

Syed AMJAD ALI

VS

Mst. KANEEZ FATIMA and 3 others

Law:

Section:

(a) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Art. 129---Presumption---Raising of construction---Proof---House in question was owned and possessed by father, while son also living in the same house claimed to have constructed first floor of the house after its purchase by the father---Validity---Presumption of law would be that the owner himself raised the construction of the first floor building until and unless contrary was proved through reliable evidence. (b) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ---Art. 102---Evidence---Registered document-Validity-Oral version cannot be entertained, much less believed over and above the contents of the registered document. (c) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ---S. 42---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.100 & O.XLI, R.31---Second appeal---Issue wise finding---Concurrent findings of fact by the courts below---Parties were real brother- and sisters in relation and dispute between them was with regard to possession of first floor of the house in dispute, which was owned by their father---Cross suits were filed by both parties and the suit filed by respondents was concurrently decreed by trial Court and Appellate Court, while that of the appellant was dismissed by both the Courts below---Plea raised by appellant was that the Courts below failed to record their findings on the pleadings of the parties and on the basis of separate issues framed by the Trial Court and therefore, provisions of O.XLI, R.31, C.P.C. were infringed---Validity---Where complicated questions of fact and law were not involved in a case and on the other hand, findings recorded by Courts below, on the pleadings of the parties, were clear enough to determine their rights on the basis of their pleadings the so passed by courts below could not be said to have infringed the provisions of law---Dispute between the parties was as to whether the father had at any time agreed to transfer first floor of disputed property in favour of appellant, his own son---Father having purchased the property through registered document and executed gift deed in favour of his daughters (respondents), the oral version of appellant to the extent that father entered into oral…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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