KHALID MEHMOOD vs SARDARAN BIBI Ss — 2024 MLD 90 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

KHALID MEHMOOD VS SARDARAN BIBI Ss. 42 & 49---Registration Act (XVI of 1908), S. 17---Declaration of title---Unregistered deed---Effect---Unregistered document neither creates any title nor right or interest in suit property as envisaged in S. 49 of Specific Relief Act, 1877---Suit for declaration under S. 42 of Specific Relief Act, 1877 on the basis of such document is neither permissible nor maintainable. Citation Name: 2024 MLD 90 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE KHALID MEHMOOD VS SARDARAN BIBI S. 17---Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), S. 118---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 42---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 17, 79 & 129(g)---Suit for declaration---Unregistered document---Exchange deed---Proof- Appellants/defendants were aggrieved of judgments and decrees passed by Trial Court and Lower Appellate Court declaring respondents/plaintiffs as owner of suit land---Validity---Unregistered deed of exchange comprising immovable property of value of more than Rupees 100/- per se was not admissible in evidence---Exchange deed was not a registered document, whereas under S. 17 of Registration Act, 1908, it was compulsorily, registerable document and without its registration, it could not be considered as a valid document---Suit for declaration on the basis of unregistered exchange deed was barred under S. 42 of Specific Relief Act, 1877---Respondents/plaintiffs did not produce marginal witnesses of exchange deed to negate execution of same without advancing any trustworthy reason in such regard---Such flaw amounted to withholding of best evidence and presumption under Art. 129(g) of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 operated against respondents/plaintiffs---No land was transferred in favor of predecessor-in-interest of appellants/defendant by predecessor-in-interest of respondents/plaintiffs, nor any document was produced by respondents/plaintiffs in such regard therefore, exchange of property in favour of predecessor-in-interest of respondents / plaintiffs was not proved---High Court in exercise of appellate jurisdiction set aside judgments and decrees passed by two Courts below as the same suffered from misreading and non-reading of evidence as well as misapplication of law and suit filed by respondents/plaintiffs was dismissed---Second appeal was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2024 MLD 90 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE KHALID MEHMOOD VS SARDARAN BIBI arts. 17 & 79---agreement---Proof---Non-production of required number of marginal witnesses is non-compliance of mandatory provision of law which is fatal.

KHALID MEHMOOD vs SARDARAN BIBI Ss — 2024 MLD 90 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 MLD