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

HAYYAT ALI vs Mst — 2023 YLR 1521 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2023 YLR 1521 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2023
Reporter
YLR
Parties
HAYYAT ALI vs Mst
Subject matter
Civil
Provisions referred to
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

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

HAYYAT ALI VS Mst. KHATOON BEGUM Ss. 42 & 54---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 17, 70, 79 & 80---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.I, R.10---Suit for declaration and injunction---Transfer by illiterate and Paradahnashin lady---Revenue officials, non-impleading of---Effect---Predecessor-in-interest of petitioners/defendants was real brother of respondent/plaintiff, who alleged that her brother had fraudulently got her land mutated in his name---Suit filed by respondent/plaintiff was dismissed by Trial Court but Lower Appellate Court decreed the same in her favour---Validity--- Predecessor-in-interest of petitioners/defendants was the beneficiary of mutation in question and failed to produce cogent, reliable and confidence inspiring evidence as per mandate of Art. 17 read with Arts. 70, 79 & 80 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984--- As beneficiary of mutation in question, no attempt was made by petitioners/ defendants to get comparison of thumb impression of respondent/plaintiff even before Trial Court or Lower Appellate Court---Such fact had gone against petitioners/respondents--- Respondent/ plaintiff was not bound to file any application for comparison of her thumb impression, as burden to prove transaction was on petitioners/defendants, who were beneficiaries and not on the respondent / plaintiff---Impleading revenue officials in every case was not a rule of thumb---In case revenue officials were not impleaded by the parties, they could always be summoned by either side or, if considered necessary, even as Court witnesses---Purpose of arraying revenue officials as party in such like cases was to provide them an opportunity to participate and put forth their defence against allegation of fraud---High Court declined to interfere in judgment and decree passed by Lower Appellate Court as the same was in accordance with law and was not irregular or erroneous---Revision was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2023 YLR

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