Citation Name: 2024 YLR 2211 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Mst. Nighat Rani vs Shah Faisal S

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

Citation Name: 2024 YLR 2211 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Mst. Nighat Rani VS Shah Faisal S.54---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 17, 79 & 129(g)---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Ss.12, 42 & 54--Sale deeds---Proof---Fraud---Non-production of marginal witnesses of initial sale deed despite being alive---Effect--- Failure to produce marginal witnesses---Presumption---Non-mentioning CNICs of the vendor and the vendee in both the deeds and non-bearing of the signature of the vendor/respondent on the subsequent deed---Effect---Plaintiff/Petitioner claimed ownership of half of the share of the disputed property by virtue of dower, which was transferred in the name of the respondent (brother-in-law of petitioner) through two sale deeds based on fraud---Contention of the respondent was that since the marginal witnesses of subsequent deed had been produced along with scribe of both the deeds therefore, requirement of law had been fulfilled---Validity---Under Art. 17(2) of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 (Order) in the matters pertaining to financial or future obligations, if reduced into writing, the instrument shall be attested by two men, or one man and two women, so that one may remind the other, if necessary and evidence shall be led accordingly---Such document cannot be used as a document until at least two attesting witnesses have been called for the purpose of proving its execution---None of the marginal witnesses of the initial deed was produced notwithstanding both the witnesses were alive at the time of trial as per the testimony of respondent without advancing any plausible reason---Non-examination of the marginal witnesses would certainly be hit by the mischief of the provision of Art.129(g) of the Order and as such an adverse inference would be drawn that had those witnesses been examined before the Court they would not have supported the stance of respondent---Under Art.79 of the Order non-examination of the marginal witnesses of initial deed despite being alive, the said deed had automatically lost its worth, therefore, the subsequent deed had also crumbled down in the given circumstances, notwithstanding that both the deeds did not contain the CNICs of the vendor and the vendee and even the subsequent deed did not bear the signature of the vendor/respondent---Respondent could not prove his stance through cogent, reliable and confidence inspiring evidence---Although respondent produced scriber/writer of both the deeds, yet a scriber could not be considered as a witness of a document vis-a-vis its marginal witnesses---Findings of the Appellate Court were the result of gross illegality and material illegality---Revision was allowed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2024 YLR 2211 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Mst. Nighat Rani vs Shah Faisal S — 2024 YLR 2211 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR