Citation Name: 2024 YLR 871 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case ALLAH BAKHSH vs GHULAM MUSTAFA 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 871 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case ALLAH BAKHSH VS GHULAM MUSTAFA S. 12---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 129(g)---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell---Suit filed by the plaintiff regarding agreement to sell/ transfer of proprietary rights qua suit property was decreed in his favour---Appeal filed by the respondents was allowed---Validity---Appellant's case was that respondent No. 1 entered into an agreement to sell with him on 02.08.2010---Document could not be registered as the certified copy of Jamabandi was not with the seller, thus the document was registered on 10.08.2010---Allegedly, respondent No. 1 transferred the disputed land to his wife/respondent No. 2 through gift mutation in lieu of dower---Said mutation was sanctioned on 18.08.2010---Claim of the respondent No. 1 was that he never entered into any agreement to sell or thumb marked any document---Record showed that the first appellate Court only on the ground that second marginal witness was not produced had reversed the decision of the Trial Court---Said Court did not take notice of the fact that the other witness was the first cousin of respondent No. 1, who had connived with him therefore he was not brought in witness box---First appellate Court further skipped the fact that stamp vendor who was also the author of the agreement could be validly considered a witness to the transaction---Statement of author of the document made it clear that he scribed the agreement at the desire of both the parties, it was read over to both of them, they accepted it as correct and then signed and thumb marked---Agreement in addition to the parties and the witnesses was also signed by the said stamp vendor, which he identified---As for as claim of the respondent No. 1 that he gifted the disputed land to his wife/respondent No. 2 in lieu of dower was concerned, the marriage between respondents had taken place in 2005---Question was what happened all of a sudden that respondent No. 1 decided to transfer the disputed land to respondent No. 2; what necessitated that urgently matter of gift was reported on 05.08.2010 and it was finally attested on 18.08.2010 exactly in the same days when agreement to sell was executed between both the sides on 02.08.2010 and was registered on 10.08.2010---Such fact spoke about mala fide conduct of both the respondents--- Respondents never bothered to produce original Nikah Nama but tendered a certified copy thereof, which was minutely perused by the Trial Court which observed that the handwriting showing entry in column 17 was entirely different from the handwriting of remaining document---Pursuant to Rule 10(2) of the West Pakistan Rules under the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, the duplicate and triplicate of the Nikah Nama filled were to be supplied to bride and bridegroom respectively, so the question arose that why none of those were produced by the respondents if they were true in their claim---Both the respondents in connivance with each other managed a so-called story and suppressed the best available evidence that was the duplicate or triplicate Nikah Nama, therefore under Art. 129(g) of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, it would be safely presumed that the said document was not favoring them---Appeal was allowed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2024 YLR 871 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case ALLAH BAKHSH vs GHULAM MUSTAFA S — 2024 YLR 871 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR