Pakistan Case LawMUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE And Another Versus Mst. RESHMAN BIBI And Another
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a High Court judgment that dismissed a Civil Revision filed by the petitioners. The petitioners claimed ownership of land based on a gift deed executed by respondent No. 1 through her agent, respondent No. 2, acting under a Power of Attorney. The core legal question was whether the Power of Attorney conferred the authority to make such a gift and whether the gift was validly executed. The trial court initially dismissed the suit challenging the gift, but the appellate court reversed this decision, finding that the Power of Attorney did not authorize the gift and that the donor lacked the intent to transfer the property to the petitioners. The High Court affirmed these findings, noting the burden of proof. The Supreme Court held that the validity and factum of the gift were questions of fact already concluded by concurrent findings against the petitioners. Finding no legal infirmity in the lower courts' judgments, the Supreme Court refused leave to appeal, affirming that findings of fact by lower courts are generally not subject to interference in this jurisdiction.
- Does a general Power of Attorney automatically confer the authority to make a gift of property?
- Can the Supreme Court interfere with concurrent findings of fact regarding the validity of a gift?
- Is the intent of the donor a material factor in determining the validity of a gift made through an agent?
ORDER
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.---Leave to appeal has been sought by the defendants in a suit for declaration; against the dismissal by the High Court, of their Civil Revision.
The petitioners are donees of land blonging to respondent No.1 said to have been gifted by her to them through respondent No.2, a daughter of the donor as her agent, through a Power of Attorney. The gift having been challenged through a suit, it was dismissed by the trial Court. The appeal against the petitioners having been allowed, the petitioners' Civil Revision was dismissed. They have, therefore, now sought leave to appeal.
The appeal Court after properly scrutinizing the Power of Attorney held that it did not confer the authority to make gift and further that the donor had never intended to gift away the property in question to the petitioners, who are the sons-in-law of her sister and that it was particularly so when the donor's own son-in-law was not given any such benefit. The High Court after noting the question relating to burden of proof affirmed the decision of the appellate Court. The factum and validity of the so-called gift relied upon from the petitioners' side are questions of fact in this case. They stand concluded by findings duly rendered against the petitioners. After hearing the learned counsel we are not satisfied that the impugned judgment requires interference by this Court. It suffers from no infirmity, legal or otherwise. Leave to appeal, therefore, is refused.
Judges on this bench
- Muhammad Afzal Zullah3,959 judgments
- S. Usman Ali Shah326 judgments