SABIR HUSSAIN vs MUHAMMAD ASHFAQ Ss — 2025 CLC 439 ISLAMABAD

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

SABIR HUSSAIN VS MUHAMMAD ASHFAQ Ss. 42 & 54---Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), S. 3---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.145---Suit for declaration and injunction---Possession, determining of---Proof---Instructions to revenue authorities---Suit filed by respondent/plaintiff was decreed in his favour by Trial Court relying upon report prepared by revenue officials during proceedings under S. 145 Cr.P.C.---Plea raised by appellant/defendant was that Trial Court did not consider report of Local Commission instead relied upon reports submitted by revenue officials in proceedings which were consigned to record without any decision---Validity---Revenue reports were issued on the direction of lawful authorities in proceedings under S. 145 Cr.P.C. which were judicial proceedings---Reports in question were not objected to by appellant/defendant during the course of their submission---Trial Court had rightly observed authenticity of reports in question---Land of appellant / defendant was far away from land of respondent/plaintiff---High Court directed that before issuance of any periodical record of rights for the purpose of sale (??? ???), Halqa Patwari should ask vendor/owner regarding possession of property and record such aspect in daily diary while incorporating mutation in register; that Halqa Patwari should verify possession of property and prepare a report confirming actual possession by inspecting or through Girdawari???????) ), that Revenue officers/Tehsildar at the time of sanctioning mutation should ensure delivery of possession Jalsa-e-Aam (???? ???) based upon report prepared by Halqa Patwari; that at the time of sanctioning mutation if land fell within the Abadi Deh (?????? ????), Collector/Revenue officer was under legal obligation to requisition a report of physical inspection from subordinate revenue officials including Qanungo, Naib Tehsildar, Halqa Patwari, etc. and should refer to the surrounding (??? ????) containing description of plot or land; that Board of Revenue/Chief Commissioner ICT, Collector/Deputy Commissioner were under legal obligation to notify Abadi Deh ( ?????? ????) through notifications under S. 3 of Land Revenue Act, 1967 in each Mouza and in case, such notification was not issued, then they should give certificate subject to verification through a circular directing subordinate officials, Registrar, Joint Sub-Registraretc. to refer the land in Abadi Deh (?????? ????) to avoid future litigation; that no Registrar, Joint Sub-Registrar were authorized to register any sale deed of land meant for construction of house or built up property unless a physical verification with reference to possession through inquiry had been made and duly recorded in the record and till such time sale deeds should be kept pending for their authorized execution; that Registrar, Joint Sub-Registrar or Revenue Officer or Tehsildar could issue local commission through any official for verification of possession of property in Abadi Deh (?????? ????) before sanctioning any mutation or sale deed; that Registrar, Joint Sub-Registrar, Tehsildar or Revenue Officer, who issue direction for verification/inspection of land under transfer, must maintain a separate register in sequence to maintain reports in their office as public record, which must be used for any purpose required under the law in any trial proceedings inquiries, etc; that Chief Commissioner shall issue such instructions through circular to his subordinate officials and non-compliance of such directions would render departmental action against the officials; that such circulars must contain timeline of inspection report, Local Commission report for verification of possession on site of any land which must be received before Register or Revenue Officer within period of seven days by all means so that general public should not be deprived from their transfer of immovable property rights; that Chief Commissioner shall call joint survey before issuance of notification under S. 3 of Land Revenue Act, 1967 from office of Surveyor General of Pakistan and could use modern devices, including but not limited to Google mapping, coordinates in land, and if possible, could also pass a direction to notify the coordinates i.e. longitude and latitude of any property or any particular point of reference for the purpose of identification of land in sale deeds---High Court further directed Chief Commissioner to also issue necessary directions to MCI, Administrator or Mayor of Local Government to issue identification number to Abadi Deh (?????? ????), which could be used in sale deed, gifted, etc. in future; that once notification under S. 3 of Land Revenue Act, 1967 was issued declaring Abadi Deh (?????? ????) and survey numbers were marked the Halqa Patwari should not record any mutation, rather, only sale deed, gift deed, etc. used as mode of transfer of immovable property---High Court also directed that sale deed must contain photographic evidence of vendor, vendee, seller, purchaser as the case may be along with witnesses, to avoid any untoward claim of fraud in future---High Court declined to interfere in judgment and decree passed by Trial Court as principle of preponderance was rightly applied and no illegality was committed in appreciation of record---Appellant/defendant failed to justify his case when he did not produce any evidence to rebut claim of respondent/plaintiff, except his own testimony which was insufficient qua the technical reports---Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances.

SABIR HUSSAIN vs MUHAMMAD ASHFAQ Ss — 2025 CLC 439 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC