| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2007 SLG 530 2007 SLD 530 2007 SCMR 614 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No.1654 of 2003, decision dated: 30-10-2006. (On appeal from the order, dated 28-11-2002 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore in C.R. No.1528 of 1998)
RANA BHAGWANDAS AND SYED, JAMSHED ALI, JJ
Ch. Khurshid Ahmed, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants. M. Munir Paracha, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents
Civil Appeal No.1654 of 2003, decision dated: 30-10-2006. (On appeal from the order, dated 28-11-2002 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore in C.R. No.1528 of 1998)
RANA BHAGWANDAS AND SYED, JAMSHED ALI, JJ
Ch. Khurshid Ahmed, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants. M. Munir Paracha, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents
MUHAMMAD AMIR and others
VS
Mst. BEEVI and others
Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877
Section: 42
Law: West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, (XVII of 1967)
Section: 42
Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)
Section: 129(e)
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 185(3)
(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S.42---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 (3)---Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to consider; whether Lower Appellate Court and High Court had committed gross error of law by reversing well-considered findings of Trial Court and in doing so, they had misread and ignored material piece of evidence. (b) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 42---Gift---Onus to prove---Donor enjoying usufruct of gifted land---Donor gifted suit-land to his nephew, almost 24 years before his death---Plaintiffs assailed the gift being a result of fraud and forgery and asserted that donor had been enjoying the usufruct of suit-land during his life-time---Trial Court dismissed the suit but Lower Appellate Court setting aside the and decree passed by Trial Court, decreed the suit---Judgment and decree passed by Lower Appellate Court was maintained by High Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction---Validity---If during his lifetime, donor was enjoying usufruct of land in dispute, it was not unusual nor it detracted from completeness of the gift in any manner---Plaintiffs in their plaint had never raised the plea that gift was bad for non-delivery of possession---Gift made in favour of defendant could not be condemned on the basis of plea of enjoying usufruct of suit-land by donor---Tenant on the suit-land stated that he had been paying produce to donee, therefore, findings of two Courts that gift was not complete, was arrived at by ignoring or misreading of material evidence---Once transaction of gift and mutation in question were shown to have been duly proved it was for plaintiffs to lead satisfactory evidence to establish the contention that it was an outcome of fraud---No evidence was available in support of such plea, therefore, s and decrees passed by two Courts were set aside and suit was dismissed---Appeal was allowed. (c) West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967)--- ----S. 42---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.129(e)---Mutation---Presumption---Mutation entries when incorporated in record of rights carry presumption of truth. Hakim Khan v. Aurangzeb and another 1979 SCMR 625 rel. (d) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10…
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