NASIR ALI vs MUHAMMAD ASGHAR S — 2022 SCMR 1054 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.

NASIR ALI VS MUHAMMAD ASGHAR S. 115---Revisional jurisdiction of the High Court---Scope---Scope of appellate and revisional jurisdiction must not be confused since there is a difference between the misreading, non-reading and mis-appreciation of the evidence---Care must be taken for interference in revisional jurisdiction only in the cases in which the order passed or a judgment rendered by a subordinate Court is found perverse or suffering from a jurisdictional error or the defect of misreading or non-reading of evidence and the conclusion drawn is contrary to law. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1054 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NASIR ALI VS MUHAMMAD ASGHAR Plaintiff must succeed on the strength of his own case rather than the weakness of the defendant. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1054 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NASIR ALI VS MUHAMMAD ASGHAR S. 42---Dispute over authenticity of a mutation document---Suit for declaration---Consequential relief---Scope---Mere declaration of title cannot be sought without asking for possession as a consequential relief---Consequential relief means a substantial remedy in accordance with the decree of declaration, if prayed for---Consequential relief denotes the relief which is an essential outcome to the declaratory relief prayed for---Plaintiff is not permitted to seek a mere declaration without consequential relief when it is necessary for the full and complete enjoyment of the property---Object of this condition is to avoid the multiplicity of suits and litigation. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1054 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NASIR ALI VS MUHAMMAD ASGHAR S. 42--- Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 117---Deceitful transaction---Burden of proof on plaintiff---Burden of proof for a deceitful transaction rests normally on the person who impeaches it---In a suit for declaration alleging that the sale was fictitious, the onus is on the plaintiff to prove the same---Where the evidence of plaintiff is self-contradictory and not confidence inspiring then he must fail and where the case is doubtful, the decision must be given in favour of defendant rather than the plaintiff. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1054 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NASIR ALI VS MUHAMMAD ASGHAR O. II, R.2---Omission to sue for one of several reliefs---Effect---Law does not permit a second suit if a right to the plaintiff is available at the time of filing of the suit---Second suit in such like situation is otherwise barred under Rule 2 of Order II, C.P.C. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1054 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NASIR ALI VS MUHAMMAD ASGHAR Witness, credibility of--- Quality of evidence--- Credibility and trustworthiness of a witness mandates to be tested with reference to the quality of his evidence which must be free from suspicion or distrust and must impress the court as natural, truthful and convincing. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1054 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NASIR ALI VS MUHAMMAD ASGHAR S. 42---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), S. 42---Suit for declaration---Dispute over authenticity of a mutation document---Impugned document of mutation mentioned the name, signature and Identity Card (ID) numbers of the respondent as vendor and the petitioner as vendee---Signature and ID card number of marginal witness as well as the identifying Lambardar were also mentioned therein, while the Naib Tehsildar attested the mutation---In evidence Lambardar who identified the parties before the Revenue Officer recorded his statement---Patwari produced the record and also confirmed the factum of entry of relevant Rapt Number by the then Patwari---Revenue Officer also confirmed and verified the physical appearance of the parties before him including the identification of parities by the Lambardar and appearance of Pattidar; he also testified that the respondent/plaintiff admitted before him the sale transaction, receipt of sale consideration and alienation in favour of petitioner/defendant---Testimony of respondent/plaintiff was based on falsehood and deceptiveness---On one hand he deposed that at the relevant time when the impugned mutation was recorded or attested he was bed ridden due to a leg fracture, hence his personal appearance before the Officers of Revenue authority was not possible for signing the document, while on the same date another mutation was recorded duly signed by him which was never challenged by him and he failed to dispute said mutation recorded on the same date without any plea of hospitalization or being bed ridden on account of leg fracture---No proof of his indisposition was produced on record along with medical record or otherwise---according to respondent/ plaintiff, Revenue Officers defrauded him but he failed to mention as to what legal action was taken by him against the said Revenue Officers---at the time of institution of suit, he claimed to be in possession but he failed to prove his possession while the petitioner/defendant discharged his burden of proof---Section 42 of Specific Relief act, 1877 expressly permitted the plaintiff to ask for further relief but in the present case neither relief of possession was claimed nor the cancellation of mutation document as a consequential relief---Hence, mere suit for declaration without claiming the consequential relief of possession and cancellation of mutation entry was otherwise not maintainable---Petitioner/defendant had established the transaction, its execution as well as the genuineness of impugned mutation. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1054 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NASIR ALI VS MUHAMMAD ASGHAR S. 42---Mutation---Scope and Burden of proof---Any person who is acquiring title through mutation, the burden of proof of proving transaction embodied in the mutation is upon him---Mutation itself does not confer or extinguish any right or title and the persons deriving title thereunder have to prove that the transferor did part with the ownership of the property, the subject of mutation in favour of the transferee and that the mutation was duly entered and attested---If the mutation on the basis of which right in the property is claimed, is disputed, the onus of proving the correctness of mutation and genuineness of the transaction contained therein would be on the party claiming right on the basis of such mutation. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1054 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NASIR ALI VS MUHAMMAD ASGHAR art. 117---Burden of proof---Scope---"Onus probandi", meaning of---If no evidence is produced by the party on whom the burden is cast, then such issue must be found against him. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1054 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case NASIR ALI VS MUHAMMAD ASGHAR S. 115---Revisional jurisdiction of the High Court---Scope---Scope of revisional jurisdiction is limited to the extent of misreading or non-reading of evidence, jurisdictional error or an illegality of the nature in the judgment which may have material effect on the result of the case or if the conclusion drawn therein is perverse or conflicting to the law---High Court has very limited jurisdiction to interfere in the concurrent conclusions arrived at by the courts below while exercising powers under section 115, C.P.C. Head NotesCase Description

NASIR ALI vs MUHAMMAD ASGHAR S — 2022 SCMR 1054 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 SCMR