Find a Lawyer

MST. KHURSHID BIBI versus RAMZAN

The Property Act (IV of 1882), Sections 122 and 123 of the Civil Procedure Code (VV 1908), the owner of section 115 suit land, left his son, widow and 3 daughters, and the inheritance was changed to the land of the plaintiff's daughters. Was confirmed, first in favor of the deceased widow and then in favor of the defendant's son, which resulted in the plaintiff's land being transferred to the plaintiff's brother, claiming that the plaintiff had transferred them. ? The shareholder in the gift-giving land denied the plaintiff's execution of a gift in favor of the brother, claiming that he was entitled to a shareholding in the suit land, after the suit was settled, his shares were found in the courts below. The plaintiffs filed a revision petition, inheriting their father's property against the decisions and orders of the courts under the assent of the plaintiff to the plaintiff, it was permissible for the said brother to defend the defendant in favor of the brother's transfer. Had failed to surrender any legitimate gift or property through the trial court, It was found that the gifts included in the jamabandi are considered to have the benefit of fact and appeal. In the course of the following case, the court completely lost the circumstances of the case appearing on the record face and there was no evidence to show that the plaintiff, whose own child And she was the husband, why she presented her shares in the gift. According to his mother and then his brother on the ground, this fact raised doubts about the reality of the alleged gift transaction, below which the court estimates that the change in the party would be included permanently. patent advocate from Malakand lawyer