ZAKI MUHAMMAD and otherss vs QUDRAT SHER and otherss
This matter concerns petitions for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Lahore High Court regarding the validity of a land mutation and an alleged sale transaction. The core legal question was whether a mutation entry, which was never formally attested due to the revocation of a general power of attorney, could be considered a valid document of title or evidence of a completed sale. The High Court had held that mere statements recorded by a Revenue Officer do not create title and that the mutation was not a document of title. It further observed that the transaction appeared to be a sham without consideration, placing the burden on the vendees to prove the sale. The Supreme Court, while disposing of the petitions, clarified that the parties were free to invoke the jurisdiction of the civil court for the redressal of their grievances. Crucially, the Supreme Court directed that any subsequent civil proceedings must be decided independently, ensuring that the observations made by the High Court regarding the merits of the transaction would not influence the civil court's determination.
- Does a mutation entry in revenue records, which has not been formally attested, constitute a document of title?
- Can a mutation entry be considered evidence of a completed sale transaction if the power of attorney authorizing the sale was revoked prior to attestation?
- Does a High Court's observation regarding the merits of a transaction in a writ jurisdiction bind a civil court in subsequent litigation between the same parties?
1. ' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.--- These petitions for leave to appeal have been filed against the judgment, dated 15-11-2000 of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan, concluding paragraph whereof is reproduced hereinbelow:--- "The mutation of sale was entered on 29-5-1988 by the Patwari. On the same day, it was placed before the E.A.S.O./Collector, who deferred the attestation till verification from the Girdawar. Before the formal attestation of the mutation, general power of attorney was revoked and this fact was brought to the notice of Assistant Collector, who cancelled the mutation/withheld the attestation.
2. Mere statements recorded by the Revenue Officer had not created any right or title in the property and were of no legal consequence. The impugned judgment have also passed on the same basis that the mutation is not a document of title. This is correct proposition of law but the question is that who is to prove that sale had actually taken place and consideration was passed or not. It was to be proved by the vendee particularly when the alleged vendees are minor sons of the general attorney and citation for revocation of power of attorney was also published in local newspapers.
3. ' Both the Courts have wrongly concluded that petitioner should file a civil suit to prove fraud. Since no title had passed; sale was to be proved by evidence which was not yet given effect, the respondents Nos.3 and 4 should prove their title or they should have filed suit for specific performance.
4. ' Apparently it is a sham transaction; the sale is without consideration; it was for the vendee to prove the same by evidence that they were transferees for consideration. Resultantly, the petition is allowed and judgments of the Member Board of Revenue and that of Collector are hereby set aside, being illegal and without lawful authority. No order as to costs."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that the petitions are ready to invoke the jurisdiction of civil Court for redressal of their grievances, but the observations made by the learned Judge of the High Court in the impugned judgment, reproduced hereinabove, shall affect their case on merits, therefore, observations may be made that the Court before whom matter shall be placed for decision shall dispose of the same independently without being influenced by the observations made by the learned High Court. And it is observed that if proceedings are instituted in pursuance of impugned judgment before the Civil Court the above observations of the High Court shall not affect the merits of the case in any manner. Thus the petitions stand disposed of accordingly.