GHULAM ASGHAR KHAN vs MUHAMMAD ARIF KHAN — 2026 SCMR 929 SUPREME-COURT

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

GHULAM ASGHAR KHAN VS MUHAMMAD ARIF KHAN. S.42---Suit for declaration of ownership regarding immovable property on the basis of oral gift---Oral gift, revocation of---Subsequent mutation in favour of donee/appellant, recalling of---Registered gift deed executed subsequently by donor in favour of his wife---Legality---Ownership status of donor---Possession of original title documents as determining factor. The dispute concerned ownership of suit property. Appellant/donee claimed ownership of 50% share through an oral gift allegedly made by respondent No.1/donor in 1984, which was later confirmed by written declaration in 1986 followed by mutation in his favour. Subsequently, donor revoked the oral gift, got mutation recalled in 1998 and executed registered gift deed of the same property in favour of his wife/respondent No.2. Appellant filed suit seeking declaration of his half ownership and restoration of earlier mutation. Trial Court decreed suit, however High Court reversed the decree. Held: The crucial question was whether oral gift of 1984 and declaration of 1986 were validly made and acted upon and whether donor had any subsisting title to gift the same property again. Courts were required to examine not only execution of gift and declaration but also consequential effect thereof. Mutation in favour of appellant by official authorities was an important factor. Mutation was withdrawn without notice to appellant. At the time of execution of registered gift deed in favour of wife in 1989, mutation based upon oral gift in favour of appellant already existed. Trial Court had properly appreciated evidence. High Court failed to discuss material evidence regarding gift transaction and possession of original title documents by appellant. Donor failed to retrieve original documents after redemption from bank. Oral gift in favour of appellant to the extent of 50% share was proved and subsequent withdrawal of mutation without notice was unlawful. Donor was not competent to gift the same 50% share to respondent No.2. Order of Single Judge in Chambers was restored and order of Division Bench of High Court was set aside. Appeal was allowed.

GHULAM ASGHAR KHAN vs MUHAMMAD ARIF KHAN — 2026 SCMR 929 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 SCMR