AYUB KHAN vs Mst — 2025 CLC 691 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

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

AYUB KHAN VS Mst. IMRANIA Ss.53, 135 & 172---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), S.42---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XLI, R. 25---Partition of landed property---Jurisdiction of Civil Court---Scope---Resolution of complicated question of facts regarding a joint property---Rights of vendee and share-holders in a joint khata in column of cultivation---Determination---Competency of a vendee of column of cultivation to participate in partition proceedings---Scope---Culmination of partition proceedings in favour of petitioners being owners in joint khata and issuance of warrants of actual possession---Respondent/vendee claimed to be owner in possession of land in dispute on the basis of mutations attested in her favour on the basis of decrees of Court---Validity---Purchaserin column of cultivation is not competent to file a suit for partition as it is in respect of the partition of the property amongst the co-owners i.e., the set of owners from a particular Khata, and vendee of column of cultivation step into the shoes of his vendor---Respondent had already approached the civil court for determination of her right---Total entitlement of respondent on the strength of mutations attested in her favour through judgment and decree, and the property, which was devolved upon her from her father, being subject to the ownership of their vendors were questions requiring resolution---a person cannot transfer a better title than he owns as envisaged in the Latin maxim 'Nemo dat quod non-habet' (no one can give what they do not have)---Total entitlement of the vendor shall be the shares alienated through mutations---Mutationsin favour of respondent in isolation with the rest of the factors might not be made basis for rectification of the entries in revenue papers unless the status of the vendor/vendors was determined---There was no evidence regarding the total ownership of the vendor of respondent and her predecessor-in-interest for resolution of her entitlement, thus, High Court was left with no other option but to have resort to the provisions of O.XLI R. 25 of C.P.C. for proper determination from Trial Court---Since intricate question of law and facts was involved in the matter, it could not be resolved by the revenue office, therefore, the submission of the petitioners for the dismissal of suit was held to be misconceived---although the entire proceedings of partition which culminated in partition mutation were affected by the suit of the respondent, yet right of respondent could not be overlooked as both i.e., the beneficiary of partition mutations and the vendee of column of cultivation, shall be seen in juxtaposition---Entire confusion and perplexity were, in fact, based upon the attestation of mutations in column of cultivation but even then, the rights of the parties required determination once for all based on Latin maxim "Ubi jus ibi remedium" which encapsulated the principle that when a legal right is violated, the law provides a corresponding remedy or relief to the aggrieved party---Civil revision was allowed, and the judgment and decree of the appellate Court was set aside and suit of the plaintiff/respondent was deemed to be pending before the Trial Court where all the vendees of column of cultivation and that of column of ownership were ordered to be arrayed and the matter was ordered to be resolved.

AYUB KHAN vs Mst — 2025 CLC 691 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC