MUHAMMAD SADIQ and others vs BASHIR AHMAD and others
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal against the order of the Lahore High Court dismissing civil revisions filed by the petitioners, which had challenged concurrent findings of lower courts upholding a registered gift-deed executed by the parties' late predecessor-in-interest in favor of the respondents. The core legal question concerned the validity of the registered gift-deed and the concurrent findings of fact regarding its execution and the donor's free will. The Supreme Court held that the concurrent findings of the lower courts, supported by the testimonies of the scribe, marginal witnesses, and the Sub-Registrar, were based on a proper evaluation of evidence and suffered from no misreading or legal infirmity. Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the petitions and declined leave to appeal, affirming that findings of fact concurrently reached by multiple forums below will not be interfered with absent a jurisdictional defect or material misreading of evidence.
- Whether concurrent findings of fact regarding the execution of a registered gift-deed can be interfered with by the Supreme Court without showing material misreading of evidence?
- Does the testimony of a Sub-Registrar and marginal witnesses suffice to prove the valid execution and free will of a donor in a disputed gift-deed?
ORDER
1. ' TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.--- Leave to appeal is sought against the order, dated 9-9-1999 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore whereby Civil Revisions No,1355 and 1356 of 1999 filed by the petitioners were dismissed.
2. ' Briefly stated facts of the case are that Muhammad Sadiq etc. Filed a declaratory suit taking exception to the registered gift-deed in favour of the respondents whereby late Munshi Ghulam Haider, predecessor-in-interest of the parties, gifted agricultural land measuring 32 Kanals in favour of respondents Nos.1 and 2. Another suit for permanent injunction was filed by the respondents to the effect that theyare owners in possession of the disputed land being gifted by their father and the petitioners/defendants Muhammad Sadiq etc. Be restrained from interfering in their possession. Both the suits were consolidated, out of contradictory pleadings of the parties issues were framed, parties led their evidence and the learned Civil Judge 1st Class, Toba Tek Singh,through his judgment, dated 31-3-1995 dismissed the suit of the petitioners and decreed that of the respondents. The petitioners filed two appeals assailing the above judgment of the trial Court, which were dismissed through a consoldated judgment, dated 21-5-1999 by the learned Additional District Judge, Gojra at Toba Tek Singh. Two CivilRevisions bearing Nos.1355 and 1356 of1999 preferred by the petitioners before the Lahore High Court also met the same fate and were dismissed by a learned Single Judge through his order, dated 9-9-1999, impugned herein. Hence, these petitions for leave to appeal.
3. We have considered the arguments raised by the learned counsel and have examined the documents brought on record with his assistance. We have noticed that possession of the disputed property is with the respondents. The predecessor-in-interest of the parties died on 13-2- 1992. The factum of gift has been supported by the evidence of scribe, marginal witnesses and the Sub-Registrar who registered the disputed gift-deed. The latter in his testimony had categorically deposed that the late donor had gifted the disputed property to the respondents out A of his free- will. He before registering the gift-deed undertook all the legal formalities. The two Courts below after evaluating the evidence threadbare upheld the factum of gift which has been maintained by the learned Single. Judge of the Lahore High Court. Learned counsel for the petitioners has failed to point out any legal infirmity or misreading in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court.
4. ' Resultantly, for what has been stated, the present petitions being without any merit are hereby dismissed and leave declined.
Cited by 2 cases
- Riasat Ali vs Muhammad Anwar. 2017 LHC 2085
- ALLAH BACHAYO Versus SAIN BUX 2016 YLRN 42