IN THE COURT OF JAVED MEHMOOD SINDHU,

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MULTAN.

Javed Mukhtiar Vs. Javed Iqbal

CIVIL APPEAL

List of Authorities referred to by the counsel for appellant.

1. 2000 CLC 419 at 420 Sec-54 T.P. Act---Sale of immovable

property---mere registration of sale
deed would not operate to pass title
to the vendee. Where there was
neither the possession of the
property alleged to have been sold
nor any proof of payment of
consideration money was available,
mere registration of sale deed would
not operate to pass title to the
vendee.

2. PLJ 1996 Pesh 214 at 216 Sale---sec 54 T.P. Act envisages the
transfer of ownership of immovable
property for a price paid or
promised---to enforce the sale
transaction, transferee is under legal
obligation to establish,
firstly that transfer was affected by a
person having a title or authority to
create right,
secondly it was backed by passing
of sale consideration and
thirdly it was accompanied by
delivery of possession---
mere registration of document by
registrar by itself does not furnish
proof of these elements which must

3. NLR 1986 Civil 146 at 147 Evidence Act, S.68---Person relying
4. 1995 MLD 1714
5. PLD 1973 S.C. 160 at 164
6. NLR 1994 SD 631
co-exist prior to execution and
registration of deed---
Onus to establish all these pre-
requisites lies on transferee.
on a document is bound to proof its
execution---fact that document is
registered would make no
difference.
T.P. Act, S.118, Qanoon-e-Shahadat
Art. 118---Exchange of land claimed
to have been effected fraudulently
and by misrepresentation---onus to
prove---plaintiff made a statement
on oath in court that exchange in
question had been effected through
fraud and misrepresentation---onus,
after such statement, would shift to
defendant to prove that document of
exchange was executed voluntarily
and of free will.
Evidence Act, Ss. 47, 67, 145 &
C.P.C. O-13, R-4---Documents
which are not copies of judicial
record, should not be received in
evidence without proof of signatures
and handwriting of persons alleged
to have signed or written them, even
if such documents are brought on
record and exhibited without
objection.
Evidence Act, S. 90---Production of
copy of deed does not raise
presumption of due execution of
original.
7. NLR 1984 Scj 32 Evidence Act, S. 74 (2)---Document
does not become a public document
merely because it is registered---
registered document in order to be
public document has to be one
execution of which is not disputed—
refusal to grant permission to
produce certified copies of
documents whose execution is
denied---unexceptionable.

8. PLD 1979 B.J. 31. Evidence Act, S.68---Execution of

document---proof---execution of a
registered document denied---
production per se of a certified copy
of such document, held, no proof of
document having been executed by
person from whom it purports to be
executed.

9. NLR 1993 Rev. 143 Art. 128 of Limitation Act---6 years

limitation time for filing declaratory
suit involving challenge to entry in
Jamabandi starts from date of
knowledge of entry in Jamabandi.

10. 1993 MLD 1023 Court Fee Act, S. 7 (iv) (c)---

Plaintiff in terms of S. 7 (iv) (c)
Court fee act is entitled to put his
own valuation on the relief sought in
the plaint.

11. PLD 1991 AJK 66 Court Fee Act, S. 7 (iv) (c) and S. 42
Specific Relief Act---Court fee
payable on suit for declaration and
consequential relief of possession---
where plaintiff could not ask for
main relief viz the possession
without asking for a declaration,
 such suit would be one for
declaration with consequential for
possession---suit in such a case
would be covered by provision of S.
& (iv) (c).

12. 1984 PSC 1230 at 1232 Court Fee Act, S. 7 (iv) (c) and S. 42
Specific Relief Act---Court fee
payable on suit for declaration and
consequential relief of possession---
where plaintiff could not ask for
main relief viz the possession
without asking for a declaration,
such suit would be one for
declaration with consequential for
possession---suit in such a case
would be covered by provision of S.
& (iv) (c).

13. 1979 CLC 867 Court Fee Act, S. 7 (iv) (c) and S. 42
Specific Relief Act---Court fee
payable on suit for declaration and
consequential relief of possession---
where plaintiff could not ask for
main relief viz the possession
without asking for a declaration,
such suit would be one for
declaration with consequential for
possession---suit in such a case
would be covered by provision of S.
& (iv) (c).

Submitted by: -
Zaffar Iqbal Khan,
Afdvocate High Court,
Counsel for appellant.