DR. SYED MUSTAFA KAMAL SHAH versus SYED ABID ALI SHAH
Articles 8, 42 and 54 of the Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Article 120 suit for declaration, recovery of possession and permanent order by the Ummah plaintiff claim that the suit property was gifted to him by his mother (donor). Was. Thus, the change in her legacy was erroneously affirmed on 29 29 1987. Prof. Deed was the author's lawyer not to be registered as a deportation witness as a lawyer, but in the absence of the plaintiff, who was sitting away from the plaintiff's office in the car. The serial number that appears on the gift's actions was not entered by her. Such statement of the date author was denied by the plaintiff and the slightest testimony of the gift covenant on the gift shows that the donor was admitted to the hospital the following day, following the execution of the alleged act. Four days after she was transferred to the Institutes Care Unit, and the same day she died, the donor's death certificate shows she was suffering from a life-threatening illness, and therefore, this is not to be expected. To sign a donor's death gift agreement. Within six (6) days (ie 27 11 1986), after the execution of the Gift Deed, on 22 11 1986 a serious nature arose in the case of the plaintiffs and the suspicions regarding his execution were invalidated. Which led to the submission of a written statement by someone. Not only was he subsequently denied by the plaintiff (brother of the plaintiff), but was not confirmed by the evidence on record. The case of such brother of the plaintiff, but at the time of his confirmation, he did not introduce the facts of the gift by his mother in favor of the plaintiff.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2013
