Section 42 The defendants of the gift of declaration changed their suit to challenge the legality of the gift in favor of their brother and challenged the legality of the trial, which the plaintiff had fraudulently approved and It was prayed that discrimination be deemed invalid, illegal and unlawful for their rights. Upon filing an appeal by the plaintiffs, the appellate court below rejected the trial court's decision and order, which was presented by the defendants under the evidence of their claim, that they had suspended the registration of the questions under them. had gone. The hardship or coercion of the defendants whose rap report was also sent to the top officials and discussed and the periodical showed that the admission was not made, but was deliberately adjusted to the space. Earlier, Patwari had excluded signatures / thumb impressions; in his presence, documents were never discussed. In the statement of material contradictions, he was also seen by the plaintiff's witnesses, who were presented by the defendant women. According to Ali's claim, the defendant, who was his brother, gifted his land to them, their own children and their children. Had a life. They did not give priority to their brother or nephew plaintiffs in the presence of their own children and spouse, nor did they offer any special service to the plaintiffs / donors, nor did the donor have any relationship with their children and spouses. The defendant may prefer the actions / actions against the wife. The occupation of the land as a co-participant, resulting in a controversial gift mutation, did not bring them any original possession when the plaintiff filed a lawsuit.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012
