Section 42 suits the plaintiffs in their claim that they were the owners of the suit land and were the plaintiffs in possession of the power of attorney and the gifts have changed, and then the nephew Girwadri in his favor. Enter entries The lawsuit was resisted by filing a detailed written statement, claiming that the gift modifications were legitimately implemented in their favor with the consent of the plaintiff and the lawsuit was filed under the reverse motive. Was dismissed, the trial court dismissed, but the appellate court accepted the appeal and filed a review petition against the plaintiffs and the claimants in favor of the defendants that their real uncle in the dispute. The gift was given through a replacement, the alleged gift mutation number where it was mentioned that no gift offering was made by the plaintiff. On behalf of the defendants. It was accepted and finally the possession of the suit land was handed over to the defendants, and the completion of the gift transaction required the delivery of three components, namely, offer, acceptance and possession, which were allegedly gift, conversion and no. The explanation was not mentioned. The appellate court below was carefully observed, after careful observation, after appreciating the evidence on file that it was observed that the gift mutation by the defendants was the result of fraud and misrepresentation and, in fact, of the defendants. No gifts were given by the source. In favor of the defendants, the appellate court has, in the following conclusions, appealed the judicial error, legal weakness, material irregularity, misrepresentation and absence of evidence to read.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
