Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 1100 2004 SLD 1100 2004 SCMR 1043
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 1463-L of 1999, decision dated: 1st July, 2002. (On appeal from the judgment, dated 8-6-1999 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in R.S.A. No. 435 of 1975)
SH. RIAZ AHMAD, C.J., SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN AND, FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, JJ
Allah Wasaya Malik, Advocate Supreme Court and M. Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. Hafeezur Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court and S.A. Aasim Jafri, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent

FIDA HUSSAIN through Legal Heirs Muhammad Taqi Khan and others

VS

MURID SAKINA

Law:

Section:

(a) West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967)-----S.42---Mutation of sale---Evidentiary value---Burden of proof--¬Mutation is not a deed of title, but is merely indicative of some previous oral sale between the parties---Whenever mutation is challenged, burden squarely lies on its beneficiary to prove not only mutation, but also original transaction, which he is required to fall back upon. (b) West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967)----- ----S.42---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.8---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)---Mutation of sale---Proof---Suit for possession by lady-plaintiff---Defendant's' plea was that he had purchased suit-land from her through mutation---Trial Court dismissed suit, but Appellate Court set aside the same---High Court dismissed appeal filed by the defendant---Validity---Plaintiff while appearing in the Court had expressed total denial about the sale---No suggestion had been put to her about amount of consideration---No original record of mutation proceedings was produced before Court---Neither Revenue Officer nor identifying witness, who allegedly identified plaintiff before Revenue Officer, was produced---Defendant while appearing as witness had not stated as to what was the amount of consideration and whether same was paid to plaintiff or not---Defendant had, thus, failed to prove either original transaction or valid attestation of mutation---Defendant on date of disputed mutation had acquired some property as mortgage from his aunt, whose name also happened to be, that of plaintiff---Defendant appeared to have got disputed mutation of sale on behalf of plaintiff attested on same date by falsely impersonating his aunt for plaintiff before Revenue Officer, who was brother-'in-law of defendant---All such circumstances collectively- proved that disputed mutation of sale was fictitious and plaintiff had been deprived of her property by defendant fraudulently---Defendant was now dead, otherwise same was the case of special costs---Supreme Court dismissed petition and refused leave. JUDGMENT SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, J.---Muhammad Taqi Khan and six others, the legal heirs of Fida Hussain, defendant in original…
🔒
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