RAMZAN KHAN and others vs Mst. JANNO and others
The defendants sought leave to appeal against the dismissal of their civil revision by the High Court, which had upheld the first appellate court's decision in favor of the plaintiff. The plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration regarding the alienation of land through a gift made by her deceased husband in lieu of her dower, accompanied by delivery of possession. The trial court initially dismissed the suit, but the appellate court allowed the plaintiff's appeal. Before the Supreme Court, the petitioners' counsel contended that the deed of conveyance should be treated merely as an agreement, or that necessary legal formalities were lacking. The Supreme Court held that the concurrent findings of fact could not be successfully assailed, and that the arguments regarding the legal nature and formalities of the deed of conveyance were contrary to established precedent law. Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition for leave to appeal.
- Can concurrent findings of fact by lower courts be successfully assailed in a petition for leave to appeal without strong legal grounds?
- Whether a deed of conveyance executed for a gift in lieu of dower lacks legal validity if necessary formalities are absent?
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--The defendants side in a suit for declaration, regarding an alienation of land through gift, has sought leave to appeal against the dismissal of their civil revision by the High Court.
2. ' Learned counsel stated that respondent No, 1 (plaintiff) had claimed that the suit property was gifted by her deceased husband to her in lieu of her dower through a deed of conveyance. She also claimed delivery of possession. But after the death of her husband, the petitioners denied her right to the property. She was therefore, compelled to file the suit which was dismissed by the trial Court. The appeal of the respondent's side was, however, allowed. The High Court dismissed petitioners' civil revision, therefore, they have sought leave to appeal.
3. Learned counsel remained unable to successfully assail the findings of fact against the petitioners.
4. He, however, contended that the deed of conveyance could, at best, be treated as only an agreement and that even if it was a deed of conveyance the necessary legal formalities in respect thereof were lacking.
5. ' After hearing him on this point, we do not agree with him on either of the points. The precedent law, he admitted, is against him.
6. ' In the circumstances of the case, accordingly, this petition is dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.