KHUDA BUKHSH vs MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE, JHANG MAGHIANA through its
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal directed against the concurrent findings regarding a suit for mesne profits. The core legal question was whether the respondent's written statement contained an admission of the appellant's ownership over the disputed land, thereby entitling the appellant to mesne profits. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that a mere reference in the written statement to the registered sale-deed relied upon by the plaintiff did not constitute an admission of ownership by the respondent, especially where the respondent had asserted adverse possession and disputed the quantum of rent. Consequently, the Court laid down the principle that a passing reference to a title document in a pleading does not amount to an admission of ownership or liability for mesne profits unless an unequivocal concession is made. The leave to appeal was accordingly withdrawn and the petition was dismissed.
- Does a reference in a written statement to a registered sale-deed constitute an admission of the plaintiff's ownership?
- Is a defendant liable for mesne profits when ownership of the disputed land is not expressly admitted in the pleadings?
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD RAFIQ TARAR, J.---In this case leave to appeal was granted in view of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant that in para. No,3 of the written statement the respondent had admitted that the petitioner/appellant had purchased an area measuring 4 Marlas through registered sale-deed out of which land measuring one Marla was in possession of the respondent and in that view of the matter there was no question of holding that the petitioner/appellant was not entitled to mesne profits for which suit was filed. Perusal of the written statement reveals that there was no admission by the respondent that the petitioner/appellant was the owner of the land in dispute. It was rather asserted therein that the respondent being in adverse position of the land for the last 15 years was not liable to pay any rent and if the Court comes to the conclusion that he was the owner even then the demand of rent at the rate of Rs,25 per month was not justified as according to the registered sale-deed the plaintiff had purchased 4 Marlas of land for Rs,400 out of which land measuring only one Marla was in occupation of the respondent. A mere reference in the written statement to the registered sale- deed by which the plaintiff/appellant had purchased the land in dispute would not mean that the respondent had accepted the plaintiff as the owner of the land in dispute. In the circumstances the leave is withdrawn and the petition is dismissed.