1984 PLP 680 (SCMR)
DR. ABDUL QADIR NASIM AND ANOTHER — Petitioners Versus HUMAYUN AND OTHERS‑ — Respondents
| Citation | 1984 PLP 680 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | ‑-Art. 185(3)‑Suit for pre‑emption‑Trial Court dismissing suit on ground that registered document made basis of suit was not a sale transaction but a gift deed‑High Court in revision restoring order of trial Court‑No reasons shown to doubt contents of registered deed which in explicit terms conveyed property as gift to donor's nephews Leave to appeal refused.‑‑Evidence |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | DR. ABDUL QADIR NASIM AND ANOTHER — Petitioners Versus HUMAYUN AND OTHERS‑ — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1984 PLP 680 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1984 PLP 680 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the ‑-Art. 185(3)‑Suit for pre‑emption‑Trial Court dismissing suit on ground that registered document made basis of suit was not a sale transaction but a gift deed‑High Court in revision restoring order of trial Court‑No reasons shown to doubt contents of registered deed which in explicit terms conveyed property as gift to donor's nephews Leave to appeal refused.‑‑Evidence bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1984 PLP 680 (SCMR) (DR. ABDUL QADIR NASIM AND ANOTHER — Petitioners Versus HUMAYUN AND OTHERS‑ — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Ch. Ghulam Dastgir Kharel, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing : 28th January, 1984.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order dated 12th November, 1983 of the Peshawar High Court, passed in C. R. No. 87 of 1982). Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ ‑-Art. 185(3)‑Suit for pre‑emption‑Trial Court dismissing suit on ground that registered document made basis of suit was not a sale transaction but a gift deed‑High Court in revision restoring order of trial Court‑No reasons shown to doubt contents of registered deed which in explicit terms conveyed property as gift to donor's nephews Leave to appeal refused.‑‑[Evidence]
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, ACTG. C. J.‑In this petition the question involved is as to whether the registered sale‑deed, dated the 15th of July, 1979, was a gift in favour of respondents Nos. 1 to 6 or a sale transaction, so as to give a right to the petitioners to maintain a suit for possession through pre‑emption. The trial Court dismissed the suit on the 27th of May, 1981, holding that this instrument was a gift‑deed. But this conclusion was reversed in appeal. The High Court in revision restored the order of the trial Court. It is again urged before us that this document should be construed as a sale‑deed. The counsel is not able to show as to whether any consideration had passed. Further he is not able to support the reason of the appellate Court that the donor in the lifetime of his brothers and his wife would not make a gift in favour of his nephews. This was merely a conjectural consi deration as the donor was not examined and no circumstance was brought to light to show that the gift was illusory. It is also immaterial if the gift deed is silent in regard to the services allegedly rendered by the respon dents as that is not an essential ingredient to make the gift legally valid: Therefore, there is no reason for us to doubt the contents of the regis tered deed, which, in explicit terms, conveys the property as gift to the nephews. The petition, accordingly, has no merit, and is dismissed. S. Q. Petition dismissed.