G-KZ4T1KYLW3 The court refused to accept the entry of the dower, considering it suspicious. 2024 Y L R 871

The court refused to accept the entry of the dower, considering it suspicious. 2024 Y L R 871

The court refused to accept the entry of the dower, considering it suspicious. 




Nikah nama | The High Court held that instead of presenting the original marriage certificate, a certified copy of the marriage certificate was presented. The court refused to accept the entry of the dower, considering it suspicious. 2024 Y L R 871


غلام مصطفیٰ نے دعویٰ کیا کہ اس نے کبھی زمین فروخت کرنے کا معاہدہ نہیں کیا اور یہ معاہدہ جعلی تھا۔ اس کے علاوہ، اس نے زمین اپنی بیوی کو ھبہ (گفٹ) کرنے کی کوشش کی، جو ایک بدنیتی پر مبنی عمل تھا۔


اس کیس کے اہم نکات درج ذیل ہیں:


1. معاہدہ فروخت کی صداقت:
مدعی اللہ بخش نے دعویٰ کیا کہ مدعا علیہ غلام مصطفیٰ نے 2 اگست 2010 کو زمین بیچنے کا معاہدہ کیا، جس کی رجسٹریشن 10 اگست 2010 کو ہوئی۔ معاہدے کی قانونی حیثیت کو ثابت کرنے کے لیے دونوں فریقین کی رضا مندی اور دستاویزات کی اہمیت تھی۔


2. جھوٹے دعوے اور بدنیتی:

غلام مصطفیٰ نے دعویٰ کیا کہ اس نے کبھی زمین فروخت کرنے کا معاہدہ نہیں کیا اور یہ معاہدہ جعلی تھا۔ اس کے علاوہ، اس نے زمین اپنی بیوی کو ھبہ (گفٹ) کرنے کی کوشش کی، جو ایک بدنیتی پر مبنی عمل تھا۔


3. غیر حتمی ثبوت اور شہادتیں:

غلام مصطفیٰ اور اس کی بیوی نے نکاح نامہ کی اصل نقل پیش نہیں کی بلکہ صرف مصدقہ نقل دی۔ عدالت نے اس میں موجود مشکوک اندراجات پر غور کیا اور اس پر سوال اٹھایا کہ اگر یہ سچ ہوتا تو اصل نکاح نامہ پیش کیا جانا چاہیے تھا۔


4. ہبہ کی منتقلی:

غلام مصطفیٰ نے زمین اپنی بیوی کو 5 اگست 2010 کو ھبہ کے طور پر منتقل کی۔ تاہم، یہ منتقلی معاہدے کے بالکل قریب ہوئی، جو کہ بدنیتی کی علامت تھی۔ عدالت نے اس کو فوری طور پر معاہدے کے وقت کا ردعمل سمجھا۔


5. ثبوت کی اہمیت:

عدالت نے اس بات پر زور دیا کہ معاہدے کی قانونی حیثیت ثابت کرنے کے لیے مضبوط اور درست ثبوت پیش کرنا ضروری ہے، جیسے کہ اصل دستاویزات اور اس کے گواہ۔


6. بدنیتی کے اثرات:

مدعا علیہان کے بدنیتی سے عمل کو دیکھتے ہوئے، عدالت نے دعویٰ کرنے والوں کے خلاف فیصلہ دیا اور مدعی کے حق میں فیصلہ کیا۔


7. عدلیہ کی جانب سے گواہ کی اہمیت:

عدالت نے اسٹامپ فروش کو معاہدے کے صحیح ہونے کا گواہ تسلیم کیا، جو اس بات کا ثبوت تھا کہ معاہدہ دونوں فریقین کی رضا مندی سے کیا گیا تھا۔



یہ نکات اس بات کو اجاگر کرتے ہیں کہ معاہدہ کی صداقت ثابت کرنے کے لیے سچے اور مضبوط شواہد کی ضرورت ہوتی ہے اور بدنیتی یا جھوٹے دعوے عدالت کے فیصلے کو متاثر کر سکتے ہیں۔


Must read Judgement




2024 Y L R 871

[Lahore (Multan Bench)]

Before Sohail Nasir, J

ALLAH BAKHSH---Appellant

Versus

GHULAM MUSTAFA and another---Respondents

Regular Second Appeal No. 213 of 2017, heard on 14th September, 2021.

Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)---

----S. 12---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 129(g)---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell---Suit filed by the plaintiff regarding agreement to sell/ transfer of proprietary rights qua suit property was decreed in his favour---Appeal filed by the respondents was allowed---Validity---Appellant's case was that respondent No. 1 entered into an agreement to sell with him on 02.08.2010---Document could not be registered as the certified copy of Jamabandi was not with the seller, thus the document was registered on 10.08.2010---Allegedly, respondent No. 1 transferred the disputed land to his wife/respondent No. 2 through gift mutation in lieu of dower---Said mutation was sanctioned on 18.08.2010---Claim of the respondent No. 1 was that he never entered into any agreement to sell or thumb marked any document---Record showed that the first appellate Court only on the ground that second marginal witness was not produced had reversed the decision of the Trial Court---Said Court did not take notice of the fact that the other witness was the first cousin of respondent No. 1, who had connived with him therefore he was not brought in witness box---First appellate Court further skipped the fact that stamp vendor who was also the author of the agreement could be validly considered a witness to the transaction---Statement of author of the document made it clear that he scribed the agreement at the desire of both the parties, it was read over to both of them, they accepted it as correct and then signed and thumb marked---Agreement in addition to the parties and the witnesses was also signed by the said stamp vendor, which he identified---As for as claim of the respondent No. 1 that he gifted the disputed land to his wife/respondent No. 2 in lieu of dower was concerned, the marriage between respondents had taken place in 2005---Question was what happened all of a sudden that respondent No. 1 decided to transfer the disputed land to respondent No. 2; what necessitated that urgently matter of gift was reported on 05.08.2010 and it was finally attested on 18.08.2010 exactly in the same days when agreement to sell was executed between both the sides on 02.08.2010 and was registered on 10.08.2010---Such fact spoke about mala fide conduct of both the respondents--- Respondents never bothered to produce original Nikah Nama but tendered a certified copy thereof, which was minutely perused by the Trial Court which observed that the handwriting showing entry in column 17 was entirely different from the handwriting of remaining document---Pursuant to Rule 10(2) of the West Pakistan Rules under the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, the duplicate and triplicate of the Nikah Nama filled were to be supplied to bride and bridegroom respectively, so the question arose that why none of those were produced by the respondents if they were true in their claim---Both the respondents in connivance with each other managed a so-called story and suppressed the best available evidence that was the duplicate or triplicate Nikah Nama, therefore under Art. 129(g) of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, it would be safely presumed that the said document was not favoring them---Appeal was allowed, in circumstances.

       Madan Gopal and 4 others v. Maran Bepari and 3 others PLD 1969 SC 617; Nazir Ahmad and another v. M. Muzaffar Hussain 2008 SCMR 1639 and Sajjad Ahmad Khan v. Muhammad Saleem Alvi and others 2021 SCMR 415 rel.

       Muhammad Akmal Khan for Appellant.

       Nemo for Respondents.

 


For more information call us 0092-324-4010279 Whatsapp Dear readers if u like this post plz comments and follow us. Thanks for reading .as you know our goal is to aware people of their rights and how can get their rights. we will answer every question, so we need your help to achieve our goal. plz tell people about this blog and subscribe to our youtube channel and follow us at the end of this post.


































 







































Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post