Importance of Two Attesting Witnesses to Prove Execution of Document

Importance of Two Attesting Witnesses to Prove Execution of Document Attesting Witnesses Case Laws Civil Law Civil Revision Concurrent Findings Evidence Knowledge - Civil Law Lahore High Court Litigation & Arbitration Scribe Solutions - Civil Law Mr. Justice Ali Akbar Qureshi in his judgment has decided the issue regarding importance of two attesting witnesses to prove execution of document in Civil Revision No. 283 of 2016.

1. This civil revision is directed against the judgment & decree dated 16.10.2015 and 15.01.2015, passed by learned Courts below, whereby the suit for Specific Performance of a contract dated 15.07.2009, was dismissed.

2. Shortly the facts for the disposal of this revision petition are that, the petitioner for the performance of an agreement to sell dated 15.07.2009, filed a Suit for Specific Performance with Permanent Injunction alleging therein, that the suit property measuring 7 kanal 2 marlas was purchased by one Mubarak son of Ghulam Ali, and uncle of the petitioner namely Muhammad Ali filed a suit for Pre-emption and at the time of filing the suit it was agreed, that Mehboob Alam would bear litigation expenses for the suit and in case the suit is decreed, the pre-empted land would be transferred equally in the name of Muhammad Ali and the petitioner. In this regard an “Iqrarnama” dated 15.07.2009 was executed but subsequently respondents refused to perform his part of the contact, therefore, the petitioner filed the suit.

3. The suit filed by the petitioner was resisted through written statement by the respondents through legal as well as factual grounds.

4. Learned trial court after framing necessary issues recorded the evidence of the parties and finally dismissed the suit on 15.01.2015.

5. Feeling aggrieved thereof, the petitioner filed an appeal, which too was dismissed vide judgment dated 16.10.2015. Hence, this revision petition.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits, that it is correct that the petitioner could not produce two attesting witnesses to prove the agreement to sell dated 15.07.2009 but the petitioner also produced PW3, who is scribe and can be substitute of the marginal witness.

7. As regard the scribe, it has already been settled, that the scribe in any circumstances cannot substitute of any marginal witnesses. I am afraid, that the argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners has any substance in the presence of the principle laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the judgment titled Hafiz Tassaduq Hussain v. Muhammad Din through LRs and others (PLD 2011 SC 241), that the scribe of the agreement having appeared as witness to prove the agreement to sell could not assume the role of attesting witness.

Further information regarding importance of two attesting witnesses to prove execution of document 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.