Mst. ZARINA BEGUM vs MUHAMMAD MOINUDDIN and another
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal against the dismissal of a High Court Appeal by a Division Bench, which upheld a single judge's decree in a civil suit seeking declaration of ownership, permanent injunction, mandatory injunction for dispossession, and damages regarding a plot of land. The core legal question concerns whether the High Court's findings regarding forgery and tampering of an Indenture of Lease and defective title were based on misreading and non-reading of the record, particularly where documents were summoned from the local government but neither formally exhibited nor supported by official testimony. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to consider the questions of law raised regarding the appreciation of evidence and record, and suspended the operation of the impugned judgment pending the final decision of the appeal. The key principle established is that findings of forgery and defective title by an appellate court must be strictly supported by legally admissible evidence and proper reading of the trial record.
- Whether findings of forgery and tampered documents can be sustained when the relevant official documents are neither exhibited nor supported by official testimony at trial?
- Does a judgment based on misreading and non-reading of the record warrant the grant of leave to appeal?
- Can an appellate court declare a title defective without proper support from the trial evidence?
ORDER
' RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.--- Petitioner seeks leave to appeal against dismissal of High Court Appeal arising out of Suit No,181 of 1995 instituted by respondent No,1 against the petitioner seeking declaration of ownership of plot in suit measuring 2028 sq. Yards that she be declared as trespasser and encroacher having no legal or valid title to the property. A permanent injunction was also sought restraining her or any one else from claiming or raising construction on the aforesaid plot and creating any interest in it. Mandatory injunction seeking dispossession of the petitioner lady was also sought in addition to the damages to the tune of Rs,5,00,000 for causing harassm ent and mental torture to the respondent.
2. The suit was resisted on the premises that Plot No,117, Block-F, North Nazimabad, Karachi had been bifurcated into two plots, one measuring 1111.11 sq. Yards and the other measuring 588.56 sq.
Yards; that the bifurcated plots were renumbered as 117-F and 117/1-F, respectively. It was alleged that plot measuring 1111.11 sq. Yards was leased out by Karachi Development Authority in favour of one Afaq Hussain Siddiqui vide indenture of lease dated 27-12-1996 in respect whereof, an agreement to sell between her and his attorney Syed Nasir Mahmood, was entered into for consideration of Rs,9,55,000. It was added that ultimately vide registered gift-deed, dated 31-12- 1994, plot was gifted in her favour by Afaq Hussain Siddiqui through his attorney. During the proceedings of the suit attorney Syed Nasir Mahmood, volunteered to join as Intervenor and was impleaded as defendant No,2. He supported the case of the petitioner in written statement but did not appear for evidence. Issues were settled. Contesting parties adduced evidence. In the ultimate analysis, suit was decreed by learned single Judge of the High Court vide judgment and decree, dated 27-1-2004 as prayed. High Court appeal preferred by the petitioner before a Division Bench of the High Court having failed, she seeks leave to appeal.
3. It is inter alia contended that the suit was filed after long delay of more than 37 years of the acquisition of alleged title to the plot in suit; that finding of the High Court to the effect that Indenture of Lease in favour of Afaq Hussain Siddiqui in fact pertained to Plot No,D-75 Sector "F", measuring 1000 sq. Feet was a tampered and forged document and that on account of defective title, respondent No,1 did not acquire any valid title to the plot in suit are not supported by record. It is further pointed out that for basing the finding of forgery in relation to the Indenture of Lease in favour of Afaq Hussain Siddiqui, documents were summoned from City District Government, Karachi, but neither any official was examined at the trial of the suit nor the documents were exhibited in evidence. It is thus urged that the findings of the High Court are based on misreading and non-reading of the record.
4. After hearing Mr. Muhammad Yasin Azad, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner and examination of impugned judgment as well as various documents, we are inclined to grant leave to appeal to consider inter alia the questions of law raised at the Bar. We order accordingly.
5. Operation of the impugned judgment shall remain suspended till decision of the appeal.