MAHBOOB ELAHI vs Mst. IQBAL JAN
This is a petition for leave to appeal directed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, which dismissed the petitioner's revision application and upheld the decree passed by the Civil Judge in favor of the respondents for declaration of title, possession of a shop, and perpetual injunction. The core legal question revolves around the propriety of interfering with concurrent findings of fact reached by the lower courts based on the appreciation of evidence. The Supreme Court held that since the findings of fact reached by the lower court are solidly rooted in the evidence on record, there is no valid justification for the apex court to interfere. The key principle laid down is that the Supreme Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact concurrent in nature that are duly supported by evidence on the record.
- Will the Supreme Court interfere with concurrent findings of fact that are rooted in evidence?
- Can a revision application challenge a decree for declaration of title and possession based on factual appreciation?
1. ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.--This is a petition for leave to appeal from the judgment of a learned Single Judge of Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, dated 5-2-1985 dismissing a revision application filed by petitioner. By that revision application, petitioner sought to challenge the judgment of Civil Judge, 11 Class, Attock decreeing respondents suit against petitioner for declaration of title and possession of a shop and for perpetual injunction against petitioner The points raised in support of the petition relate to appreciation of evidence and since we find that the findings of facts reached by the Court below are rooted in evidence, there is no valid justification for this Court to interfere.
2. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.