Pakistan Case Law
1991 S CM R 771

ZABITA KHAN And Others vs GANDERI GUL And Other

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1991 S CM R 771
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 486-R of 1989C.R. No. 38 of 1987
Date1990-02-21
Judge(s)Shafi-ur-Rehman, Rustam S. Sidhwa
ResultLeave granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, arising from a dispute involving the determination of parentage and the evidentiary value of documentary records. The core legal questions presented for consideration involve whether oral evidence is sufficient to displace established documentary evidence, such as a pedigree-table, and whether the lower court erred by failing to examine additional evidence regarding the parentage of petitioners Nos. 2 and 3, who were excluded from the pedigree-table. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to address these issues, specifically focusing on the weight and sufficiency of evidence required to challenge official pedigree records. The Court directed the parties to furnish security and permitted the filing of further documents to ensure a comprehensive disposal of the appeal. The Court also ordered the original trial court record to be requisitioned for the final hearing. The decision establishes the scope of the upcoming appeal, focusing on the interplay between oral testimony and documentary proof in matters of lineage and succession.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can oral evidence be sufficient to displace documentary evidence such as a pedigree-table?
  • Should a court examine additional evidence regarding parentage if a party is not shown in the pedigree-table?
leave to appealpedigree-tableevidentiary valueoral evidencedocumentary evidenceparentage

ORDER

1. RUSTAM S. SIDHWA, J.---We have heard the arguments of the I learned counsel for the petitioners and have perused the record. Leave is hereby granted to consider the following questions:

(i) Whether oral evidence could or was sufficiently satisfactory to displace the documentary evidence (such as the pedigree-table etc.) produced by the parties in the case; and

(ii) Whether in holding that Muhammad Karim and Fazal Karim petitioners I Nos.2 and 3 were not the sons of Sher Hassan, because they were not so shown in the pedigree-table, the Court should have examined other evidence as regards their parentage.

2. The petitioners shall furnish security in the sum of Rs.2,000. The appeal shall be heard on the present record. The parties are at liberty to file such further documents as they consider fit and proper for the full and final disposal of the appeal. The office shall send for the original trial Court's rile so that the same is present when the appeal comes up for hearing.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.