PLD 2016 Lahore High Court, Multan Bench
C.R. No.999-D/2006
BACKGROUND:
Ms. Jameela Begum filed this civil revision against the dismissal of her appeal by Additional District Judge on date 13.12.2004 and against the judgment and decree passed by the civil judge on the date 13.11.2003. Whereby, the petitioner's suit for the declaration of permanent injunctions and consequential relief challenging the transfer of her property of gift mutation No.1307 and 1308 both on the date 29.06.1987 was dismissed.
FACTS:
The petitioner filed suit for the declaration of permanent injunction and consequential relief against her brother, defendant Qadeer Ahmed on 03.06.2002. The petitioner claimed that their mother after the death of their maternal uncle inherited 32-kanal land. On the death of their mother, property measuring out of 32-kanal, 8-kanal was inherited by the plaintiff as a daughter, 16-kanal by the defendant, Qadeer Ali as son and 8-kanal was given to Barkat Ali as husband. After the death of Barkat Ali, Qadeer Ali initially rendered the share in the produce property but on 26.04.2006 he refused to do so and claimed to be the exclusive owner. The petitioner property is transferred to her father through mutation by the revenue officer and then to the respondent through mutation No.1308 but she claimed that she had never appeared before the revenue office. The petitioner therefore challenged both the mutations on the ground of fraud, misrepresentation and collusion. Hence, petitioner has challenged both the judgments of the previous courts maintaining that both the courts below suffered from material irregularities and courts have not read the records plus have not applied judicious mind.
The respondent on the other side claimed that the petitioner had transferred her property to father Barkat Ali on account of love and affection and father on the same date had transferred the property of 16-kanal to the respondent through gift mutation No. 1308. The defendant claims that the transfer of the property is genuine and the suit filed by her is not maintainable.
ISSUES
The gift mutation No. 1307 and No. 1308 were done on the basis of free consent or not.
The dismissal of the case by the below courts on the basis of not having the cause of action really applies to the plaintiff or not
Case of an illiterate lady would be treated as a pardah Nasheen lady or not
ARGUMENTS:
The petitioner in this case has set the points in front of the court that being an illiterate “Pardah Nasheen” lady has denied the execution of gift mutation thus to prove the genuineness of gift mutation shifted to the respondent and which respondent has not been established the ingredients of gift. In addition to this the entries of the mutation No. 1307 and 1308 on the same date also raise doubt about its genuineness, the petitioner has been deprived from her property without her concern.
To the other side the respondent argued that the gaminess of the mutation
0 Comments