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

Abdul Ghaffar vs Member (Judicial-I), Board of Revenue, Balochistan S — 2026 MLD 541 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Citation
2026 MLD 541 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN
Court
Balochistan High Court
Year
2026
Reporter
MLD
Parties
Abdul Ghaffar vs Member (Judicial-I), Board of Revenue, Balochistan S
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 115---C; S. 115---R; S. 115; Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

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

Abdul Ghaffar VS Member (Judicial-I), Board of Revenue, Balochistan S. 115---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 115---Revenue matters---Jurisdiction of Revenue Courts---Scope---Petitioner challenged the concurrent findings of the Revenue authorities through a revision petition under S.115, C.P.C.---Controversy pertained to the mutation of agricultural land situated in the revenue estate---Petitioner contended that the lower revenue forums failed to appreciate the entries in the record-of-rights and wrongly attested mutation in favor of the respondents on the basis of a disputed registered sale deed---Validity---Perusal of record showed that the respondents purchased the land through a registered sale deed, and the vendor had admitted the execution of the same before the Sub-Registrar---Mutation was accordingly attested by the competent revenue officer after fulfilling all codal formalities---Concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Revenue Officers and upheld by the appellate authority clearly indicated that the sale transaction was genuine and validly executed---Revisional jurisdiction of the High Court under S.115, C.P.C. is limited and circumscribed to cases where the subordinate court or tribunal has exercised jurisdiction not vested in it by law, failed to exercise jurisdiction so vested, or acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity---High Court cannot substitute its own findings of fact for those of the competent fora unless the findings are shown to be perverse, based on no evidence, or suffering from misreading or non-reading of material evidence---No such legal infirmity or jurisdictional defect was pointed out in the impugned orders passed by the revenue authorities---Revision petition was dismissed in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2026 MLD

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