PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

Mst. NAIK MURGH vs SANAULLAH S — 2021 CLC 1138 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Citation
2021 CLC 1138 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN
Court
Balochistan High Court
Year
2021
Reporter
CLC
Parties
Mst. NAIK MURGH vs SANAULLAH S
Subject matter
Civil
Provisions referred to
S. 52---Q; S. 52; Balochistan Land Revenue Act

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

Mst. NAIK MURGH VS SANAULLAH S.52---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts.117 & 120---Plea, proof of---Onus to prove---Entries in record of rights---Presumption---Plaintiff claimed to be owners of suit property and defendants were in unlawful possession--- Plea raised by plaintiffs was that defendants with collaboration of Settlement Authorities mutated disputed land in their names in record of rights as Bazgarin possession---Suit was decreed by Trial Court but Lower Appellate Court reversed the findings and dismissed the suit---Validity---Plaintiff failed to produce any document or oral evidence in regard of collaboration of defendants with revenue authorities---Possession of defendants was admitted by witnesses and attorney of plaintiffs--- Suit land was in possession of defendants in settlement of year 1991-92 and defendants were in possession as Bazgar of the land---Entries of mutation in record of rights carried presumption of truth under S.52 of Balochistan Land Revenue Act, 1967---When a party had alleged a fact must prove it on the strength of his own evidence--- Statements of witnesses of plaintiffs were contradictory with each other---For proving case there had to be consistency in statements of witnesses and plaintiff--- When there was any ambiguity or inconsistency in statement of witnesses and plaintiff, then suit was to fail---Plaintiffs failed to point out any illegality and irregularity in judgments and decrees passed by Lower Appellate Court---High Court declined to exercise revisional jurisdiction as judgments and decrees were not passed in excess of authority or mis-exercise of jurisdiction or material irregularity nor were arbitrary---Revision was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2021 CLC

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English