AHMAD and others vs ALLAH DIWAYA and others
This is a petition for leave to appeal directed against the order of the Lahore High Court upholding the concurrent judgments and decrees of the lower courts which decreed the respondents' suit to the extent of a half share in the suit land as legal heirs of Mst. Bachi. The core legal question raised before the Supreme Court is whether the lower courts rightly relied upon pedigree-tables, Exh.P.10 and Exh.D.4, without the formal proof of their contents by examining a witness. The Supreme Court held that prima facie, previous judicial precedents support the petitioners' contention that the mere exhibition of a pedigree-table as a document is insufficient without its contents being duly proved through evidence. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal to consider this question.
- Whether the courts below can rely upon a pedigree-table without the examination of a witness to prove its contents?
- Is the mere exhibition of a pedigree-table as a document sufficient proof of its contents under the law?
ORDER
' AJMAL MIAN, J.---This is a petition for leave to appeal against the order dated 23-4-1996 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court in Civil Revision No,201-D-96, filed by the petitioners against the concurrent judgments/decrees dated 23-1-1995 and 21-3-1996 of the learned Civil Judge, Liaquatpur, and of the learned Additional District Judge, Liaquatpur, in Civil Suit No,181 of 1992 and in Civil Appeal No,55/19 of 1993, respectively, decreeing the respondents' suit to the extent of 1/2 share in the suit land as legal heirs of Mst. Bachi, dismissing the same by maintaining the above concurrent judgments/decrees. The petitioners, who claim also to be the legal heirs of Mst. Bachi to the exclusion of the respondents, have filed the present petition for leave to appeal.
2. In support of the above petition Mr. Shaukat Ali Mehr, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioners, has contended that the Courts below have relied upon pedigree-table, Exh.P.10 and Exh.D.4, without examining any witness in support thereof to explain the same. To reinforce the above submission he has relied upon the case of Muhammad Hussain and others v. Muhammad Khan (1989 SCM R 1026) and the case of Muhammad Naeem and others v. Ghulam Muhammad and others (1994 SCM R 559), in which it has been held that the contents of a pedigree-table are to be proved and mere exhibition of the same as a document is not sufficient.
3. Prima facie, the above reports support the case of the petitioners. We are inclined to grant leave to consider the question, as to whether the Courts below have rightly relied upon aforesaid Exh.P.10 and Exh.D.4 without the proof of their contents. Leave is, accordingly, granted.
Cited by 3 cases
- Mst. Badami and others vs Mst. Budhee and others 2022 LHC 2200
- Mst. Badami and others vs Mst. Budhee and others 2024 MLD 534
- ALI BAHADUR Versus NAZIR BEGUM 2005 PLD 218