HABIB-UR-REHMAN vs GHULAM MUHAMMAD (LATE) S — 2023 CLC 788 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

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

HABIB-UR-REHMAN VS GHULAM MUHAMMAD (LATE) S.52---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.VI, R. 1---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 113 & 132---Suit for declaration, permanent injunction, correction of entries and partition was initially decreed ex-parte---On application of respondents/defendants ex-parte decree was concurrently set-aside---Validity---Record revealed that entries in record of rights was also effected in name of the petitioner/plaintiff---Settlement of Mouza was conducted in 1984 and plaintiff filed suit after 26 years of settlement---Petitioner himself working in revenue department of concerned District had not challenged the disputed mutation---Petitioner pleaded in plaint that suit land was inherited property---Such assertion if believed, how the entries were effected in name of petitioner---Petitioner had tried to cover up the question of limitation---Mere bald assertion was not enough that petitioner came to know about the settlement in 2008---Petitioner had failed to prove his contention through evidence---Question of limitation was a question of law and fact----Where party alleged that suit was within time, it should prove the same---Suit was barred by law---Despite repeated directions by the trial court for production of witnesses whose statement were recorded during ex-parte proceedings, petitioner failed to comply with the order---Opposite party had right to cross-examine the witnesses for extracting truth---On failure to produce witnesses for cross-examination, Court could draw an adverse inference against party from its conduct---Record of right carried presumption of truth and strong evidence was required to rebut the attestation---Mere verbal assertion was not enough to rebut the entries in record of right---Statement of petitioner on oath was not in consonance with the pleading---Purpose of framing issues was that parties were fully aware of subject matter in controversy and evidence was to be led by parties---Revision petition was dismissed accordingly.

HABIB-UR-REHMAN vs GHULAM MUHAMMAD (LATE) S — 2023 CLC 788 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 CLC