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

PIR MUHAMMAD vs MEHMOOD KHAN Ss — 2022 CLC 1646 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Citation
2022 CLC 1646 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN
Court
Balochistan High Court
Year
2022
Reporter
CLC
Parties
PIR MUHAMMAD vs MEHMOOD KHAN Ss

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

PIR MUHAMMAD VS MEHMOOD KHAN Ss.54 & 123---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 117 & 118---Suit property was mutated in the name of father of plaintiffs---Defendants contended that the suit property was purchased property which was purchased in 1951 but transferred in their name in 2001---Plaintiffs contended that they never sold the property to the defendants---Burden of proof lay on the defendants to prove that they validly purchased the suit property---None of the witnesses were present at the time of alleged sale/purchase---No valuation of sale was mentioned in written statement---Record showed that Transfer was effected on basis of hiba (gift)---Defendant produced no witness of purchase or hiba---Neither father of the defendants (who was Naib Tehsildar) nor the defendants bothered to transfer the same in their names for half a century---Adjacent property was transferred in the name of the father of defendants---Attorney stated that suit property was purchased by grandfather, but defendants stated that they purchased the same in 1951---National Identity Card showed that one defendant (Elder among brothers) was born in 1953---Transfer was effected without knowledge of plaintiffs, fraudulently with the connivance of concerned revenue authority---No limitation would run against fraudulent transactions---Fraud vitiated even solemn order-- Defendant, in respect of his claim of hiba, had neither produced any witness as to prove factum of hiba, nor any official from the revenue staff; and failed to furnish reason for such gift---Not believable that one deprived the sons and gift the property to another person---High Court observed that when respondent was no more a land owner how the sale purchase could remain intact---All three Revision petitions were dismissed accordingly. Head NotesCase Description

Other judgments reported in 2022 CLC

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