Section 42 and 54 of the Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), sections 122, 123 and 129 suit gifts and perpetual injunction gift transfer of property by the claimant claimed that they were owned by the plaintiff named Tamilak. It was alleged that the hereditary variable was confirmed after his predecessor's death, based on fake, false, false, hypothetical, factual and collusion and was responsible for keeping it separate. And that the defendants had no concern with the disputed property, and at the same time the courts below the defendants claimed that their predecessor had gifted all their property in their favor, Had failed to establish the facts of acceptance and physical supply. The alleged donor was also unable to prove that the possession of the property in his favor by the plaintiff was that the common proponents of the parties (the alleged donor) loved and loved the plaintiffs / advertisements and hated the lost legal heirs. Under the gift of property in their favor in relation to the property that failed to be proved, the courts below had their claim in the absence of any illegal, material misconduct, misrepresentation or non-reading of evidence or both. The concurrent results of the courts, in the event of any jurisdictional error, are justified. This amending jurisdiction of the High Court cannot be interfered with
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2011
