| Case ID |
03f8a0c6-f3d7-426b-8cfa-d3d4ce898b42 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Civil Revision No. 31-A of 2013 |
| Decision Date |
Feb 22, 2021 |
| Hearing Date |
Feb 22, 2021 |
| Decision |
The High Court dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioners, affirming the decision of the Lower Appellate Court. The court found that the DNA test report could not be conclusive evidence regarding the relationship of the parties involved, and the Lower Appellate Court had correctly assessed the evidence presented, which included reliable documentary and oral testimonies. The petitioners' claims lacked substantial evidence to overturn the findings of the Lower Appellate Court. Hence, the decision rendered was based on sound reasoning and proper appreciation of the facts. The petitioners were unable to demonstrate any jurisdictional defect or misreading of evidence, leading to the dismissal of their revision petition without costs. |
| Summary |
The case involves a civil revision petition concerning a dispute over inheritance rights between the parties claiming to be legal heirs of Muhammad Ayub Khan, who was the son of Arsalah Khan. The petitioners, led by Barkat Khan, contested the findings of the Lower Appellate Court, which had decreed the suit in favor of the respondents, Banaras Khan and others. Central to the case was the validity of a DNA test report that claimed the parties were not cousins, which the High Court determined was insufficient as conclusive evidence. The court emphasized the importance of reliable documentary evidence and sound reasoning in adjudicating inheritance claims under the Specific Relief Act and Qanun-e-Shahadat. The ruling underscored that the Lower Appellate Court had jurisdiction to decide the matter and had based its decision on a comprehensive assessment of the evidence presented. The High Court’s decision to dismiss the revision petition reflects a commitment to uphold the integrity of legal proceedings and the importance of substantial proof in inheritance matters. This case highlights the complexities of familial legal disputes and the role of forensic evidence in establishing relationships, while also reinforcing the standards of evidence required in civil litigation. |
| Court |
Peshawar High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
SHAKEEL AHMAD, J
|
| Lawyers |
Qazi Obaid-ur-Rehman,
Sher Afzal Khan Jadoon,
Sajjad Ahmad Abbasi,
Khurram Ghias Khan,
Abdul Wahid Khan Jadoon
|
| Petitioners |
5 others,
BARKAT KHAN
|
| Respondents |
10 others,
BANARAS KHAN
|
| Citations |
2022 SLD 135 = 2022 PLD 15
|
| Other Citations |
Nazar Khan v. Mst. Hassan Begum and another 2013 MLD 913,
Mujeeb ur Rehman v. Rehana Bibi through attorney and 8 others 2020 YLR 722
|
| Laws Involved |
Specific Relief Act, 1877,
Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)
|
| Sections |
42,
54,
64
|