16. It has been repeatedly held by the Superior Courts, and similarly
law itself provides, that proceedings before the Revenue Courts are of
summary nature. Whenever complicated question of fact is involved, the
exclusive jurisdiction vests in the Civil Court to decide the same. The
Revenue Courts have exceeded from their jurisdiction and have erred while interfering in the complicated question of title based on alleged fraud. The
longstanding entries qua the allegation of fraud should be dealt by the Civil
Court because Revenue Courts have no jurisdiction to interfere in such like
matters. The mutation being summary proceedings Revenue authorities
could not clinch such complicated matter in summary proceedings. At the
time of attestation of mutation, no detailed evidence is recorded by the
Revenue Officers and it is otherwise the function of the Civil Court to
decide matters after framing of issues and recording of evidence of both
the parties. Reference is placed on case-law reported as Muhammad Naeem
v. Siraj-U-Din and 6 others (2015 CLC 1084), Mst. Khurshid Bibi and
others v. Liaqat Ali and others (2010 Y L R 2729), Muhammad Nawaz
and others v. Pir Bakhsh and others (1990 CLC 1968) and Muhammad
Ishaq v. Member (R), Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore and 18 others
(1994 MLD 2254).
Used in Judgment of
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT M U L T A N B E N C H M U L T A N JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Writ Petition-Land-Miscellaneous
11548-15
2020 LHC 937
0 comments:
Post a Comment