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

Mst. ILYAS AKHTAR vs PROVINCE OF PUNJAB Ss — 2023 YLR 2441 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2023 YLR 2441 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2023
Reporter
YLR
Parties
Mst. ILYAS AKHTAR vs PROVINCE OF PUNJAB Ss
Subject matter
Civil
Provisions referred to
S. 45---C; West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967); 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

Mst. ILYAS AKHTAR VS PROVINCE OF PUNJAB Ss. 42 & 54---West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), S. 45---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XLI, R.25---Suit for declaration and injunction---Mutation, assailing of---Procedure--- Expression, "sufficient cause"---Scope---Additional evidence, producing of---Principle---Respondents/ plaintiffs assailed mutations transferring land in favour of petitioner/defendant---Suit was decreed by Trial Court in favour of respondents/plaintiffs---During pendency of appeal, Lower Appellate Court declined to allow petitioner/ defendant to adduce additional evidence in her support---Validity---Where a party challenged vires of a mutation in revenue record, it became essential for the other party who was deriving any title from such transaction to prove valid execution of mutation in question---Entries made in record of rights had strong presumption in favour of the party who derived title from such entries but the presumption could be rebutted, if evidence was led to that effect and it was essential for the party relying on such entries to bring them on record---When vires of a mutation was direct in issue, Court could not pronounce a just judgment without looking at the documents which were in dispute and without recording statements of those who wished to prove or disprove documents in question---Such factor was sufficient to bring the case within the expression "sufficient cause" which appeared in O. XLI, R. 27, C.P.C.---When persons who allegedly put their thumb impressions and signatures on the mutations denied doing the same then Lower Appellate Court should have permitted opinion of Finger Prints Expert as additional evidence but by failing to do so it had failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in it---High Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction set aside order passed by Lower Appellate Court and permitted petitioner/plaintiff to produce additional evidence---Revision was allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2023 YLR

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