MUHAMMAD ASHRAF and others vs Mst. SAIRAN BIBI through L.Rs, and others
This petition for leave to appeal challenged a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which had accepted a civil revision and set aside concurrent findings of the trial and appellate courts regarding the validity of a gift deed. The core legal question was whether the High Court was justified in interfering with concurrent findings of fact under its revisional jurisdiction. The Supreme Court examined the evidence, noting that the scribe of the gift deed admitted he did not know the executant, failed to record the identifier's details, and did not read the document to the executant. Furthermore, the marginal witnesses were not examined, and there was no proof that the Sub-Registrar confirmed the execution with the donor. The Supreme Court held that the lower courts had grossly misread the evidence, rendering their findings unsustainable. The Court affirmed the High Court's decision, establishing that revisional courts may interfere with concurrent findings of fact when such findings are based on a gross misreading of evidence or lack any legal proof of execution.
- Can a High Court interfere with concurrent findings of fact under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 if the evidence was grossly misread?
- Is a gift deed valid if the scribe fails to identify the executant or read the document to them?
- Does the failure to examine marginal witnesses to a gift deed affect the proof of its execution?
- Section 115, Code of Civil Procedure 1908
ORDER
' MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.--- This petition is directed against judgment, dated 22-9-2003 of the Lahore High Court, whereby Civil Revision bearing No,188-D of 1992 filed by the respondent has been accepted.
2. The land in dispute was admittedly owned by Mst. Saira Bibi who was Phoophi of the present petitioners. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners she had inherited the land in dispute along with the father of the petitioners from their father. According to the petitioners she, through the registered deed allegedly gifted the land in dispute to the petitioners who are, as noted above, her nephews.
3. During her life time Mst. Saira Bibi filed the present suit for declaration that she did not gift the land to the present petitioners, therefore, the said gift deed was a fraudulent document. The trial Court through judgment, dated 29-6-1988 dismissed the suit. Appeal filed by the respondent- plaintiff was also dismissed by the First Appellate Court through judgment, dated 28-11-1991 against which revision petition filed by her has been accepted through the impugned judgment by the Lahore High Court against which this petition is directed to seek leave to appeal.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners who argued that concurrent findings of facts as to the execution of gift deed recorded by the two learned Courts have been interfered under section 115, C.P.C. Which is not permitted by law.
5. We have gone through the record and find that the learned Judge in High Court came to the conclusion that the evidence was grossly misread, therefore, the said findings were not sacrosanct, as such not sustainable.
6. We have been taken through the evidence produced by the petitioners to prove execution of the gift deed. Maqbool Jillani, the scribe of the document appeared as D.W.1 and stated that he did not know the executant of the document before it was scribed by him. It was also admitted by him that no mention of any person who had identified Mst. Saira Bibi was made nor signatures of the identifier were present on the relevant register maintained by him. He also admitted that the document was not read over to the executant. Muhammad Anwar one of the donees who appeared as D.W.2 admitted that one Muhammad Ali and Muhammad Rehan were marginal witnesses of the gift deed but none of them was examined. Ghulam Qadir who was examined as D.W.3 stated that he was Lamberdar of the village but he did not state in his evidence that Mst.
Saira Bibi was asked by the Sub-Registrar about the execution of the gift deed or that she admitted its execution. In these circumstances, it was rightly held by the High Courts that findings of the two Courts below were based on gross misreading of the record. In our considered view no legal evidence whatsoever is available about the proof of the execution of the gift deed by Mst. Saira Bibi who in her life time filed the present suit and denied its execution. Learned Judge of the High Court has rightly taken into consideration the circumstance that there was no reason as to why Mst. Saira Bibi in the presence of her own son and four daughters would gift the property to her nephews. In our view it is a case where an attempt was made by the brother of Mst. Saira to grab her property under the garb of gift.
7, For the foregoing reasons, no illegality has been committed by the High Court in acceptance of revision petition and setting aside the judgments of the two Courts below. Therefore, this petition has no merits which is accordingly dismissed. Leave refused.
Cited by 3 cases
- Ghulam Dastagir and another vs Allah Baksh 2023 YLR 2637
- Muhammad lqbal, etc. vs Ghulam Farid, etc. 2012 C.L.R. 1394
- Mst. RAZIA BEGUM and others vs ASMAT KHAN 2011 PLD Peshawar 10