ATTA MUHAMMAD vs Mst — 2021 SCMR 73 SUPREME-COURT

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

ATTA MUHAMMAD VS Mst. MUNIR SULTAN (DECEASED) Ss. 42(1), 42(6) & 42(7)--- Gift--- Gift mutation--- Proof---Section 42(1) of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1967 ('the Act') required the person in whose favour the land had been transferred/alienated to report the same to the revenue authorities, which in the present case would have been the donees of the gifts but they did not do so---Furthermore subsections (6) & (7) of S. 42 of the Act required that before passing an order sanctioning change in the register of mutations in respect of any right which had been acquired, the person from whom it was acquired should be identified by 'two respectable persons, preferably the Lambardar or members of Zila Council, Tehsil Council or Town Council or Union Council' but the two said witnesses in the present case were not such persons---Sufficient material was on record to suggest that the petitioners had acted dishonestly and gift mutations were illegally made in their favour---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and leave was refused with costs throughout imposed upon the petitioners. Citation Name: 2021 SCMR 73 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case ATTA MUHAMMAD VS Mst. MUNIR SULTAN (DECEASED) Ss. 39 to 45---Records-of-rights and Periodical Records---Revenue department---Observations recorded by the Supreme Court regarding unsatisfactory performance of revenue department with respect to maintaining Revenue records. Citation Name: 2021 SCMR 73 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case ATTA MUHAMMAD VS Mst. MUNIR SULTAN (DECEASED) Gift mutations---Proof---Daughters disentitled from inheritance through gift mutations made illegally---Purported donor at the time of his death was over ninety years of age, in poor health with serious questions raised over his state of mind---Purported gifts were made a few months before the donor passed away---Gift mutations show that donor himself reported that he had gifted the lands but the mutations did not mention when and where he had made the said gifts nor as to when and where the same were accepted by the purported donees/petitioners---Not a single one of the documents referred to by the petitioners were signed or thumb impressed by purported donor---Particulars of the gift were also not mentioned in the written statement filed by the petitioners---One of the witnesses to the gifts did not testify---Burden to prove the gifts was on the petitioners who failed to discharge such burden---Two of the purported donees/petitioners did not testify and only one of them testified, but he did not testify as an attorney of the other two donees---Material particulars of the gifts, including when and where the lands were gifted, accepted and possession of the lands delivered was not mentioned in the gift mutations, in the roznamcha waqiati (daily diary register), in the written statement or any other document---In the present case an extremely old man allegedly gifted his property by excluding his five daughters---Such unusual circumstances should have alerted the Revenue staff to be more cautious and before sanctioning the gift mutations they should have ensured the identity of the donor, should have obtained a copy of his identity card, should have obtained his signature and/or thumb impression, should on account of his advanced age and frail state of mind ensured that the donor knew that he was making the said gifts---In the circumstances it would also have been prudent to have issued notices to the donor's daughters to bring it to their knowledge that their father was gifting away all his lands---Sufficient material was on record to suggest that the petitioners had acted dishonestly and gift mutations were illegally made in their favour---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and leave was refused with costs throughout imposed upon the petitioners.

ATTA MUHAMMAD vs Mst — 2021 SCMR 73 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2021 SCMR