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

Syed PERVAIZ HUSSAIN vs ZIKR-UR-REHMAN S — 2024 SCMR 1683 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Citation
2024 SCMR 1683 SUPREME-COURT
Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Year
2024
Reporter
SCMR
Parties
Syed PERVAIZ HUSSAIN vs ZIKR-UR-REHMAN S
Subject matter
Civil
Provisions referred to
S. 54---R; S. 49---Q; Registration Act (XVI of 1908); Specific Relief Act (I of 1877); Registration Act

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

Syed PERVAIZ HUSSAIN VS ZIKR-UR-REHMAN S. 54---Registration Act (XVI of 1908), S. 49---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 79---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Ss. 42 & 54---Un-registered power of attorney---Presumption of correctness---Document, proof of---Principle---Concurrent findings of facts by the Courts below---Predecessor-in-interest of respondents/plaintiffs claimed to be owner of suit plot in question and had denied execution of any power-of-attorney in favour of predecessor-in-interest of petitioners/ defendants---Judgment and decree passed by Trial Court in favour of respondents/plaintiffs were maintained by Lower Appellate Court as well as by High Court---Plea raised by petitioners/defendants was that power-of-attorney in question was duly notarized---Validity---There was no registered power-of-attorney, therefore, presumption of correctness could not be attached in terms of section 49 of Registration Act, 1908---In absence of any registered document, whose registration was compulsory, no immovable property could be transferred on the basis of purported unregistered general power-of-attorney---Predecessor-in-interest of petitioners/ defendants did not produce or exhibit power-of-attorney in question, in terms of Article 79 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, as neither alleged attorney/sub-attorney nor Notary Public and attesting witnesses were produced by predecessor-in-interest of petitioners/defendants---Basic document which was alleged to be a general power-of-attorney dated 19-02-1977 was not registered and was held to be a forged document by three Courts below through concurrent findings recorded to such effect---Burden shifted upon the beneficiary of such alleged power-of-attorney, which could not be discharged by predecessor-in-interest of petitioners/defendants---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and leave was refused.

Other judgments reported in 2024 SCMR

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