Presumption of execution

2017 YLRN 348 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Art. 100Document more than 30 years oldPresumption of executionScope

No absolute presumption to the execution of document could be attached within the meaning of Art. 100 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984

Such presumption was permissible and not imperative even if document to be a 30 years old and was produced from proper custody.

2017 YLRN 348 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S. 54Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.100Suit for declaration"Sale"IngredientsBurden of proofScopeDocument more than 30 years oldPresumption of executionScope

Contention of plaintiffs was that sale deed was the result of fraud and misrepresentation which was inoperative upon their rights

Suit was decreed by the Trial Court but the same was dismissed by the Appellate Court

Validity

No material was available on file to negate the assertion of plaintiffs that their grandfather was owner of suit property

Disputed sale deed was got executed in the year 1945 but same was not brought into picture till 1998 when the mutation was got attested by the defendant

Suit property had already been mutated in favour of plaintiffs

Alleged vendee did not appear before the Trial Court as a witness

Onus was on the defendant to prove the validity of alleged sale deed

Defendant, being beneficiary of sale deed was bound to prove the sale transaction by producing witnesses in whose presence bargain of sale was struck and price was paid to the alleged executant

If payment of consideration of alleged sale had not been proved, there could be no "sale" in the eye of law

Defendant had failed to establish the essential elements of valid sale and if any of the ingredients of "sale" was missing, he had to suffer

Disputed sale deed was a registered document of more than 30 years old but the same was rebuttable

No absolute presumption to the execution could be attached within the meaning of Art. 100 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984

Court was not bound to attach presumption to the execution of a document more than 30 years old in all cases without attending to the relevant facts of each case

Such presumption was permissible and not imperative even if document to be a 30 years old and was produced from proper custody

Neither the original sale deed was brought on record nor any attesting witness of the same was produced by the defendant-vendee during the trial

Even no application to seek permission for producing copy of document by leading secondary evidence was moved by the defendant

Suit property was owned by the predecessor-in-interest of plaintiffs when impugned sale deed was executed in favour of defendant

Findings recorded by the Appellate Court were not sustainable in the eye of law

Impugned judgment and decree passed by the Appellate Court were set aside and those of Trial Court restored

Revision was accepted, in circumstances.