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

Citation Name: 2024 CLC 725 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD DAWOOD vs KHUDAIDAD Ss — 2024 CLC 725 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Citation
2024 CLC 725 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN
Court
Balochistan High Court
Year
2024
Reporter
CLC
Parties
Citation Name: 2024 CLC 725 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD DAWOOD vs KHUDAIDAD Ss
Subject matter
Civil

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

Citation Name: 2024 CLC 725 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD DAWOOD VS KHUDAIDAD Ss. 42, 39 & 54---Suit for declaration, cancellation of mutation, partition and permanent injunction---Shamilat land---Co-sharer---Scope---Plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration, cancellation of mutation, partition and permanent injunction claiming that their father had purchased land measuring 10 rods 16 poles vide a mutation along with share of water and shamilat; that defendants mutated the land in their favour without lawful authority and as such was liable to be cancelled---Suit was resisted by the defendants---Suit was decreed by the trial Court and appeal was dismissed---Validity---Record transpired that the suit property bearing khasra No. 667 was mutated as Shamilat land---Subsequently the petitioners transferred it vide a mutation in their names---Admittedly, the father of the respondents/plaintiffs purchased the land having seven khasra numbers from a private person and became owner of the property---Shamilat land did not belong to one land owner rather the land owner of the respective area---Thus, there was no valid ground for transfer of the Shamilat land in the names of petitioners---Petitioners had not disputed the document produced by the respondents---Even at the time of exhibition of document the petitioners had not objected meaning thereby that the documents were exhibited without objection---Judgment recorded had presumption of its correctness and credibility was attached to the proceeding before judicial forum---Strong and unimpeachable evidence was required to rebut the presumption which was lacking in the case in hand---Mere bald assertion without any documentary proof could not rebut the judicial proceeding---Petition being devoid of any merit was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2024 CLC

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