Find a Lawyer

Revision No. 362 of 1962‑63, decided on 27th March 1963, District Lahore.

S. 16‑Commis sioner may record evidence of parties at stage of revision.

S. 84‑Powers of revi sion subject to limitations contained in S. 115, Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908).

-----

---‑ Proceedings are summary in character.

A. R. Sheikh for Respondents.

This case relates to the inheritance of Mst. Bakhtawar who was a limited owner of the property in dispute having succeeded to it on the death of her husband Wassan. She died on 28‑10‑1961 and quite obviously succession will now re‑open and will be governed by the provision of section 3 of the West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act. The Assistant Collector who dealt with the case at the initial stage gave to Sardar, Chiragh and Nawab sons of Mst. Bakhtawar from an earlier husband th share and the remaining th of to the resi duaries of Wassan. The Collector maintained this order in appeal but the learned Commissioner interfered in revision and in my opinion correctly. Evidence was led before him to the effect that Mst. Bakhtawar had a daughter, Saira, who pre‑deceased her and was married to Abdullah son of Kala, full brother of Wassan. This was admitted before the Commissioner by some of the parties whereas others urged that Mst. Saira was married to Alia, a brother of Abdullah and did not at all re‑marry Abdullah a second time after Alia's death. The learned Commissioner, how ever held that there was sufficient material on record in favour of Mst. Saira's second marriage to Abdullah and decided the inheri tance as follows :‑

Ahmad son of Kala, full brother of Wassan 5/16, Kamala and Chiragh sons of Abdullah son of Kala mentioned above 9/16, Sardar, Chiragh and Nawab residuaries of Mst. Bakhtawar 1/8th. A revision petition has been filed against this order by Muhammad Yaqub etc. who are descendents of Nathu Pehlwan and Sultan, consanguine brothers of Wassan.

The main argument urged before me is that the learned Com missioner was not competent under the law to admit new evidence in revision. In addition to admitting this evidence, statements of parties have not been recorded by him in his own handwrit ing. Neither of these two contentions find any force in law.

Section 16 of the Land Revenue Act which gives powers to the Commissioner to call for, examine and revise proceedings of Revenue Officers does not lay down the two limitations which have been pleaded by the learned counsel for the petitioners. On the contrary this section authorises the Commissioner to pass "such order as he thinks fit". There is a distinction between the grounds on which a Commissioner may interfere in revision under the Tenancy Act and under the Land Revenue Act; it is only under the former Act that his powers of revision are subject to the same limitations and restrictions as those of the High Court under section 115 of the C. P. C. Powers of revision should be exercised in revenue cases where failure of justice has taken place and there was sufficient material before the learned Commissioner, to support the decision that he arrived at. As a matter of fact an attested copy of mutation No. 710 decided on 9‑3‑1927 which has been produced by Mr. A. R. Sheikh counsel for Chiragh, Ahmad and Kamala bears out that Mst. Saira had re‑married Abdullah, a brother of her first husband Alia after the latter's death. It may, also be added that mutation proceedings are summary in character, and the provisions of the Evidence Act are not applicable to them nor do they decide the rights of parties. As best these proceedings merely raise a presumption in favour of one of the parties and it is always open to the other party to go to a Civil Court to establish their right. In view of the above discussion I would hold that the decision arrived at by the learned Commissioner is correct and dismiss the revision petition.

Announced, in open Court in presence of Muhammad Yaqoob, one of the petitioners.

K. M. A. Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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