Find a Lawyer

Civil Petition No. 67‑R of 1983, decided on 30th October, 1983.

(On appeal from the judgment and order dated 1‑2‑1983 passed by the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, in Civil Revision No. 13 of 1983).

‑‑ Art. 185(3)‑Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), S. 54‑Transfer of land by sale‑deed‑Four years after sale‑deed another deed was executed by way of rectification of error as Khasra number was not mentioned in said sale‑deed‑Question as to whether disputed piece of land was part of said Khasra number‑Supreme Court being not satisfied either from Local Commissioner's report or other material on record as to whether disputed land was part of same Khasra number and holding that matter required further probe‑Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and case remanded to trial Court with liberty to parties to lead such evidence as they might think proper for resolving controversy.

Sh. Riaz Ahmad, Advocate‑General Punjab with Tanvir Ahmad Khan, Assistant Advocate‑General Punjab instructed by Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate -on‑Record for Petitioners.

M. Kowkab Iqbal, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent.

Date of hearing : 30th October, 1983.

In this case the question which requires determination is as to whether the disputed piece of land is a part of Khasra No. 673 or 674. Khasra No. 674 measures 12 Kanals and stands transferred to the petitioner. The respondent claimed that the disputed land was included in Khasra No. 673, which was purchased by him pursuant to a registered sale‑deed dated 27‑9‑1974 from one Muhammad Rafi. Four years after the execution of this document another dead was executed by way of rectification of the error as the Khasra number was not mentioned in the sale‑deed.

The trial Court dismissed the suit of the respondent for permanent injunction, but on appeal he succeeded and the revision filed against it was dismissed. The appellate Court had relied on the report of the Local Com missioner, but we are not satisfied either from this report or from the other material on the record as to whether the disputed land is a part of Khasra No. 673 or 674, and, accordingly, in our view this question requires further probe. This being so, the learned counsel for the parties agreed that the case be remanded to the trial Court for the determination of this question afresh. It will be open to the parties to lend such evidence as they might think proper for resolving the controversy.

The petition is, therefore, converted into an appeal and disposed of accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.

M. Z. M. Case remanded.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.