Khatoon Begum vs Khan Zaman

2011 M L D 1813 [Peshawar]

Before Waqar Ahmad Seth, J

KHATOON BEGUM and others---Petitioners

Versus

KHAN ZAMAN and others---Respondents\

Civil Revision No.1101 with C.M. No.948 of 2011, decided on 8th August, 2011.

Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)---

----S. 8---Suit for possession---Suit for recovery of possession of land which allegedly was encroached upon by the defendants by constructing building thereon without consent and permission of the plaintiff---Defendants who were in possession of suit land since 1993, by producing evidence had proved that suit land was given to them by original owner thereof in exchange of two properties---Suit which was filed after lapse of 17/18 years from the possession of the defendants thereon, was rightly dismissed by the Trial Court and Appellate Court---No misreading or non-reading of evidence had been pointed out nor any illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional defect had been shown by the counsel in impugned judgments of the courts below, which could justify interference by the High Court in its revisional jurisdiction---Revision was dismissed in circumstances.

S.M. Attique Shah for Petitioners.

ORDER

WAQAR AHMAD SETH, J.---Impugned herein is the judgment and decree dated 26-5-2011 of the learned Additional District Judge-XI, Peshawar vide which the appeal of the petitioners was dismissed against the judgment and decree dated 18-1-2011 of learned Civil Judge-XXI, Peshawar.

2.Short but relevant facts of the case are that the petitioners filed a suit against respondents for recovery of possession of land measuring two kanals and one marla illegally encroached upon by the respondents by constructing a building thereon without the consent and permission of the petitioners. Respondents 1 to 4 were asked time and again to admit the claim of the petitioners and deliver possession to them but they declined.

3.Respondents were put on notice, to which respondents 1 to 4 submitted written statement. Issues were framed and evidence was recorded. After the pro and contra evidence adduced by the parties, the learned trial court dismissed the suit vide judgment and decree dated 18-1-2011. Appeal filed thereagainst also met the same fate vide judgment and decree of learned Additional District Judge-XI, Peshawar, hence the revision petition in hand.

4.Learned counsel for petitioners contended that the courts below have not appreciated the evidence in its true perspective and rendered judgments, which are nullity in the eyes of law; that the learned appellate court has not recorded his judgment as required under Order XLI, Rule 31, C.P.C., which is not warranted in law.

5.Admittedly, respondents 1 to 4 are in possession of the disputed property measuring 2 kanals 1 marla since 1993 and have made construction over it, which fact was admitted by P.W.2 in his cross-examination. They claimed the same to be given to them by original owner, namely, Safiullah DW-2 in exchange of two properties located/ situated at different places. The alleged exchange has been proved by respondents 1 to 4 as per evidence produced by them. Admittedly, the suit for possession was filed in the year, 2010 i.e. after lapse of 17/18 years from the possession. Learned counsel for petitioners referred to section 142 of the Limitation Act, 1908 which also provides for 12 years time.

6.Apart from the above, no misreading or non-reading of evidence has been pointed out nor any illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional defect has been shown by the learned counsel

in the impugned judgments, which could justify interference by this court in its revisional jurisdiction, hence instant revision petition has no substance, which is accordingly dismissed in limine along with C.M.948 of 2011.

H.B.T./252/P Petition dismissed.