Citation Name: 2023 CLC 2002 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NOOR SHAH ALI KHAN alias NAWARISH ALI KHAN

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

Citation Name: 2023 CLC 2002 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NOOR SHAH ALI KHAN alias NAWARISH ALI KHAN VS KHAN MOMIN S.115---Concurrent findings---Revisional jurisdiction of the High Court---Scope---Concurrent findings of facts, in absence of any illegality or any other error of jurisdiction, did not call for any interference by the High Court in its revisional jurisdiction. Citation Name: 2023 CLC 2002 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NOOR SHAH ALI KHAN alias NAWARISH ALI KHAN VS KHAN MOMIN Pleadings must contain only 'factum probanda' and not 'factum probantia'---Material facts on which the party relies for his claim are called factum probanda (material facts) and these must be stated in the pleadings---Fact(s) by means of which factum probanda are proved and which are in the nature of factum probantia (particulars or evidence) need not be set out in the pleadings; they are not facts in issue, but only relevant facts required to be proved at the trial in order to establish the fact in issue. Citation Name: 2023 CLC 2002 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NOOR SHAH ALI KHAN alias NAWARISH ALI KHAN VS KHAN MOMIN arts. 79, 100 & 126---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), S. 42---Suit for declaration---Presumption as to thirty years old documents---Execution of old gift-mutations---Proof---Plaintiff/sister instituted suit against the brother denying execution of gift-mutations through which ownership of her entire inherited property was transferred in his favour long time ago---Trial Court decreed her suit, and appeal preferred by the defendant/petitioner was dismissed by the appellate Court---Contention of the petitioner/defendant was that the mutations-in-question, having been executed more than thirty years ago, were to be dealt with in consonance with provisions/protections under arts. 100 & 126 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984---Validity---alleged thumb impression of the plaintiff (alleged donor) on the mutations-in-question were compared by the Trial Court with admitted ones, but they were too faint for comparison--- Record revealed that alleged donor was not identified by her husband and sons---Ingredients of alleged gift were neither mentioned in the written-statement nor elaborated in the evidence adduced by the petitioner/defendant---Fact of offer of alleged gift, its acceptance, transfer of possession were not proved---Mere thirty years of a document would not provide any justification for its proof unless the document was proved in accordance with art. 79 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, when it was questioned --- Sole ground that the age of the document was thirty years would not be taken as gospel truth when genuineness of the document was disputed---It was the duty of Court to determine the question of its genuineness and correctness because age of the document alone would not amount to be proof about the correct contents of such document---If genuineness of a document was susceptible to suspicion, the Court would refuse to raise presumption and could ask for the proof of its contents ---Respondent / plaintiff had proved her case whereas the petitioner / defendant had tried to grab her property and in doing so he succeeded as well, but when it was challenged, he remained unsuccessful to prove it--- No illegality or infirmity was noticed in the impugned decrees and judgments passed by both the Courts below---Revision was dismissed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2023 CLC 2002 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case NOOR SHAH ALI KHAN alias NAWARISH ALI KHAN vs KHAN MOMIN S — 2023 CLC 2002 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 CLC