2006 PLP 930 (SCMR)

TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.

Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment, dated 14-5-2001 whereby a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, upheld the determination of the learned First Appellate Court and decreed the suit filed by the respondent.

2. Facts briefly are that the respondent Mst. Surriya Begum was owner of 60 Kanals and 11 Marlas of land situated in Chak No.9, Gor-Bux Pura, Tehsil Phalia, District Gujrat. Certain persons occupied her land in an illegal manner whereupon she executed a general power of attorney Exh.D.1 in favour of the petitioner Fateh Khan, as she felt handicapped being Parda Nasheen to pursue the matter personally. This litigation terminated in her favour. Fateh Khan, General Attorney of the respondent, however, sold the entire land on the basis of that General Power of Attorney to his wife Mst. Muhammad Bibi.

3. On coming to know about this illegal venture of his General Attorney, she filed a declaratory suit taking exception to the general power of attorney as well as to the sale-deed. This was controverted by the petitioner. Out of contradictory pleadings, issues were framed. The parties led their evidence and the learned Civil Judge, Mandi Baha-ud-Din, dismissed the suit on 8-5-1978. The respondent lady filed an appeal which was accepted by the learned Additional District Judge, Gujrat vide his judgment, dated 12-5-1982. Feeling. aggrieved, the petitioners filed second appeal which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, through his judgment, dated 14-5-2001. Hence, this petition for leave to appeal.

4. We have considered the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the documents appended with this petition. Admittedly, the respondent Mst. Surriya Begum was an illiterate Pardanasheen lady. The petitioner did not bring to her notice that the property respecting which the general power of attorney was executed, was going to be sold to his wife. It was incumbent upon the petitioner to have proved that she was made to understand that she was also giving him power to sell the property in dispute. Even otherwise, it has not been proved that any consideration was passed to the respondent lady. The learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court has maintained the determination of the learned First Appellate Court after advancing cogent reasons. It would be appropriate to reproduce the determination of the learned Single Judge which are in the following terms:-- "

5. As regards the other issue, whether a valid power of attorney, was given by the respondent to Fateh Khan, which included the power to sell the property, the learned Appellate Court, through scanning the evidence, has come to the conclusion that the respondent was an illiterate Pardanasheen consequently, it was incumbent upon the appellants to have proved that she was made to understand, that in the power of attorney she is also giving an authority to the attorney to sell the property in dispute. The appellants have failed to prove this vital aspect of the matter.

6. With regard to the endorsement of the Sub-Registrar on the power of attorney, that the document was read over to the respondent, it has been held, that this endorsement, is of routine nature and it cannot be construed therefrom, that the respondent was specifically apprised that she is also giving the power to Fateh Khan to sell the property. The view of the learned Appellate Court, that in case of a Pardanasheen lady mere thumb-marking a document, does not tantamount to a valid execution until and unless such lady, was duly appraised and made to understand about the true nature and the contents thereof, is absolutely correct."

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has failed to point any illegality, misreading or non-reading in the impugned judgment B warranting interference.

6. Resultantly, for what has been stated above, the instant petition being devoid of any force is hereby dismissed and leave to appeal is refused. S.A.K./F-126/SC Leave refused.