Mr. Justice Ch. Muhammad Iqbal in his judgment has decided the issue regarding disputed gift and sale mutations to deprive female legal heir of her lawful inheritance in Civil Revision No. 332-D of 2016.
1. Through this civil revision, the petitioner has challenged the validity of judgment & decree dated 27.09.2012 whereby the suit for declaration filed by the respondent was decreed by the learned Civil Judge, Hasilpur; and the judgment & decree dated 04.02.2016 whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Hasilpur.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent / plaintiff filed a suit for declaration against her brother / petitioner / defendant contending therein that she is the owner of land measuring 17-Kanals 10-Marlas comprising Khewat No.221/274, Khatooni No.920, Rectangle No.270/4, Acre No.23, 19 situated in Mauza Baidana Gharbi on the basis of inheritance mutation No.1272 dated 07.05.1984. The respondent challenged the mutations No.1273 and 1274 dated 07.05.1984 on the ground that she never alienated her share in favour of her mother, she never appeared before any revenue officer for the attestation of mutation No.1273 nor received any amount, she is an illiterate and ‘Parda Nasheen’ lady. The petitioner / defendant filed contesting written statement. Learned trial Court after framing the issues and recording the evidence of both the parties decreed the suit in favour of the respondent vide judgment & decree dated 27.09.2012. The appeal against the said judgment & decree was also dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Hasilpur vide judgment & decree dated 04.02.2016. Hence, this civil revision.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both the impugned judgments & decrees are based on mis-reading and non-reading of evidence; that the respondent herself alienated the property in question through impugned mutation but both the Courts below without considering the oral as well as documentary evidence decreed the suit in favour of the respondent.
4. Heard. Record perused.
5. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner and respondent are the real brother and sister. After the death of their father, inheritance mutation No.1272 (Exh. P-1) was entered on 25.03.1984 on the information of Abdul Haq in favour of his legal heirs i.e. Mst. Zainab Bibi (widow), Sharifan Bibi (daughter) and Abdul Haq (son) and another impugned gift mutation No.1273 (Exh. P-2) was also got entered allegedly by Mst. Sharifan Bibi on 25.03.1984 (the same day) in favour of her real mother Mst. Zainab Bibi.
Whereas, Mst. Zainab Bibi further gifted out the said property to her son Abdul Haq through gift mutation No.1274 (Exh. P-3) incorporated in the revenue record on 27.03.1984 and all the above three mutations were simultaneously sanctioned on 07.05.1984.
6. The plaintiff/respondent has categorically taken a stance in the plaint that she had never gifted her inherited property to her mother. She asserted further that after inheritance she was in possession of the land through her tenant Abdul Haq s/o Sharf Din who has been paying rent to her. Thereafter she leased out the land to her brother whose possession over the land was as a tenant who fraudulently and surreptitiously with collusion of the revenue officials got entered and sanctioned the impugned gift mutation.
7. Initially the burden to prove the alleged fraud was upon the respondent / plaintiff. The respondent / plaintiff appeared as PW-1 and deposed that her brother Abdul Haq took her at the house of Patwari Halqa near Darbar Muhammad Shah Rangeela; Patwari Halqa obtained her thumb impression and told her that inheritance mutation had been attested regarding her share in the estate of her deceased father; that she affixed her thumb impression only on the inheritance mutation and had not affixed thumb impression on any sort of gift mutation; further deposed that gift mutation is forged and fictitious; she never appeared before any revenue officer for the attestation of gift mutation in favour of her mother; she deposed further that after the inheritance mutation the land was in her possession through her tenant Abdul Haq s/o Sharf Din caste Gill (Jutt) who cultivated the land for 3/4 years whereafter she rented the said land to PW-3 and after that she rented out the said land to her brother Abdul Haq who remained paying the rent in shape of money or by some agricultural produce. In the lengthy cross-examination, the petitioner / defendant had failed to shatter the credibility of the witness (PW-1). Abdul Haq S/o Sharf Din (PW-2) deposed that he accompanied the parties at the time of inheritance mutation in favour of Sharifan Bibi; he remained in possession of the land about 3/4 years as tenant of Mst. Sharifan Bibi after the inheritance mutation and paid her lease or rent money.
Further information regarding disputed gift and sale mutations to deprive female legal heir of her lawful inheritance can be solicited from AUJ LAWYERS. Feel free to contact us in case you need any clarification and/or require legal assistance regarding similar matters.