Mst. GHULAM FATIMA vs MUHAMMAD DIN and others
This petition for leave to appeal arose from a civil suit challenging the validity of a land sale mutation, which the plaintiff alleged was procured through fraud and forgery. The trial court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, a decision subsequently upheld by the First Appellate Court and the Lahore High Court in revision. The petitioner, the purchaser, argued that the sale was valid because it was executed by the respondent's attorney, whose power of attorney was admitted. The Supreme Court observed that the attorney had sold the land to his own wife, effectively constituting a sale in his own favor. The Court held that an attorney is legally obligated to consult the principal before exercising power in their own favor. Consequently, the Court affirmed the lower courts' judgments, ruling that the mutation was rightly struck down due to this breach of fiduciary duty. The petition was dismissed as meritless, finding no illegality, misreading, or non-reading of evidence in the concurrent findings of the lower courts.
- Is a sale of land by an attorney to his own wife valid if the principal was not consulted?
- Does an attorney have a legal obligation to consult the principal before exercising power in their own favor?
- Can a mutation of sale be struck down if the attorney acts in their own interest without the principal's consent?
' MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.---The suit filed by the predecessor-ininterest of the respondent that Mutation No,896 of sale of the land in favour of the petitioner was the result of fraud and forgery, therefore, not binding on her and did not affect her ownership right in the priority in dispute was ' decreed by the trial Court through judgment tinted 3-5-1995. The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Virst Appellate Court through judgment dated 22-6-2000 against whichrevision petition filed by her has been dismissed through the impugned judgment dated 6-7-2000 by the Lahore High Court, against which leave is sought.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the land of the respondent on her behalf was sold by her Attorney who was his nephew and maintained that since the execution of power of attorney in his favour had been admitted therefore, the sale made by the attorney on her behalf was binding on her.
3. We have noticed that the attorney sold the land to his wife which constitute sale in his own favour. It has been held by this Court as rule of law that an attorney if wanted to exercise power in his own favour has to consult the principal before doing so therefore, on this score alone, the mutation of sale in dispute was liable to be struck down.
4. The judgments passed by the Courts below in this case are perfectly in accordance with law and do not suffer from any illegality such as misreading or non-reading of any material piece of evidence, therefore, this petition being meritless is hereby dismissed and .
Cited by 6 cases
- Syed Monis Raza & others vs Mst. Asia Bano & others 2024 LHC 3849, 2025 CLC 168
- Syed MONIS RAZA Versus Mst. ASIA BANO 2025 CLC 168
- Muhammad Amir and another vs Zahid Hussain and another 2022 LHC 2669
- Khizar Yaseen etc. vs Mst. Khadija Bibi etc 2017 LHC 221
- ALLAH DITTA vs NASREEN AKHTAR and another 2009 CLC 870
- Allah Ditta vs Nasreen Akhtar And Another K.L.R. 2010 Revenue Cases 97