| Case ID |
16a40b25-1613-4818-a116-37df96121218 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Regular Second Appeal No.09, Civil Revisions Nos.2 |
| Decision Date |
Aug 29, 2022 |
| Hearing Date |
Aug 12, 2022 |
| Decision |
The Islamabad High Court dismissed the Second Appeal No.09 of 2018, along with Civil Revision Nos.272 and 273 of 2018. The Court upheld the decisions made by the Trial Court and Lower Appellate Court, which had previously ruled in favor of the buyer in a dispute involving a gift deed and a sale agreement concerning a plot of land. The Court found that the requisite proof for the validity of the gift deed was lacking, particularly regarding the delivery of possession and the absence of a registered deed. The Court also noted that the minor discrepancies regarding earnest money were inconsequential, and that the execution of the sale agreement was not denied by the husband. As a result, the Court concluded that there was no substantial error in the previous judgments, and the appeals were dismissed. |
| Summary |
In the case before the Islamabad High Court, a dispute arose over the ownership of a plot of land, with claims made by the wife, the husband, and a buyer. The wife contended that the plot was gifted to her by the husband, while the husband denied this claim, asserting his ownership. The buyer claimed to have purchased the property from the husband. The trial court consolidated the suits and ruled in favor of the buyer, which was upheld by the appellate court. The High Court found that the requirements for proving the gift, such as delivery of possession and proper documentation, were not met. The case highlights important aspects of property law under the Specific Relief Act, particularly regarding gifts between spouses and the necessity of proving ownership through concrete evidence. The decision underscores the need for clear documentation and witness testimony in property disputes. This ruling is significant for those involved in similar disputes, as it clarifies the legal standards necessary for establishing claims of ownership and the validity of gift deeds. |
| Court |
Islamabad High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Saman Rafat Imtiaz
|
| Lawyers |
Asad Hussain Ghalib,
Zubair Aslam,
Naved Malik,
Ch. Abdur Rehman Nasir
|
| Petitioners |
Mst. SHAHIDA PARVEEN through Legal Heirs and others
|
| Respondents |
SAEED AHMED and others
|
| Citations |
2023 CLC 838,
2023 SLD 1465
|
| Other Citations |
Aslam Khan v. Khushdin Khan 2015 MLD 213,
Mst. Bachoo v. Abdul Qayyum Khan alias Habib Ullah 2015 CLC 805,
Mushtaq Ul Aarifin v. Mumtaz Muhammad 2022 SCMR 55,
Federation of Pakistan v. Javed Iqbal ILR 2022 IHC 186,
Muhammad Amin v. Mst. Shaista 2015 MLD 296,
Muhammad Yousaf v. Allah Ditta 2021 SCMR 1241,
Muhammad Riaz Hussain v. Zahoor Ul Hassan 2021 SCMR 431,
Mudassar Ali v. M. Zafar Iqbal Pirzada ILR 2022 IHC 113,
Aqeel Feroz v. Shahid Jamil Sethi 2020 MLD 1669,
Amjad Ikram v. Mst. Asiya Kausar 2015 SCMR 1,
Sher Muhammad v. Muhammad Bakhsh 2017 YLR Note 296,
Faiz Bukhsh v. Rab Nawaz 2017 YLR Note 352,
Mst. Rehmat v. Mst. Zubaida Begum 2021 SCMR 1534,
Bahar Shah v. Manzoor Ahmad 2022 SCMR 284,
Manager, State Bank of Pakistan v. Ch. Muhammad Ikram 1999 PLC (C.S.) 1558,
Hafiz Tassaduq Hussain v. Muhammad Din PLD 2011 SC 241,
Mst. Umar Bibi v. Bashir Ahmad 1977 SCMR 154,
Ma Mi and another v. Kallander Ammal AIR 1927 PC 22,
Fakhur-Ud-Din v. Mst. Zohra Bi 1989 SCMR 2017,
Abdul Mateen v. Mustakhia 2006 SCMR 50,
Mst. Eidun Nisa Begum v. Member (Revenue), Board of Revenue, West Pakistan, Lahore PLD 1973 Pesh. 1,
Jabbar Pramanik v. Nurjahan Bewa PLD 1960 Dacca 489,
Shamshad Ali Shah v. Syed Hassan Shah PLD 1960 (Lahore) 300,
Riaz Ullah Khan v. Asghar Ali 2004 SCMR 1701,
Sikandar Hayat v. Ahmad Sher 2003 CLC 1006,
Waheed Gul v. Mst. Saida Jan 1998 MLD 3,
Mst. Waziran v. Kalu 1995 CLC 1532,
Muhammad Naeem Shafi v. Mst. Shamim Akhtar 2022 CLC 744
|
| Laws Involved |
Specific Relief Act, 1877
|
| Sections |
12,
39,
42,
54
|