The 30-year-old document of the Arts 100 and 126 Specific Relief Act (of 1877), proofs of Articles 8 and 42 of suit and proof of burden, assumes the fact that the defendants prosecuted the impression that they The owner was the owner. He prayed for the land and alternatively for its occupation. The defendants conceded that the suit land was originally the property of the predecessor in the interest of the plaintiffs, but it was subsequently sold to the predecessor in the interest of the defendants, whose regular record appears in the income record. Was. The defendants also asserted that with the transfer of title, the possession of the suit land was transferred to the defendants as well, both the trial and the appellate court had prepared a valid record, proving that the land in dispute was theirs. Is in permanent possession of. The records of the revenue records were confirmed, once it was established that the suit was in the possession of the defendants, the claim was transferred to the plaintiffs to prove their ownership so that it could be proved. The defendants are not the original owners of the suit land The basic written instruments were in connection with the sale of the suit land for sale in interest in the documents thirty years old, which is protected under Article 100 of the Law Evidence at 1984 of 1984, which implemented it. To establish a factual theory, it was said that there was no denial of the claim proceedings, The source did not need further evidence filed, the court had rejected simultaneously. The concurrence of the courts below may not interfere with the High Court's review jurisdiction.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2011
