Attestation of mutation of sale does not furnish proof of the sale and whenever any such transaction is questioned, the onus lies on the beneficiary to prove not only the transaction but also every ingredient thereof as also the executed document as token of its acknowledgment.

 It is also trite that mere attestation of mutation of sale does not furnish proof of the sale and whenever any such transaction is questioned, the onus lies on the beneficiary to prove not only the transaction but also every ingredient thereof as also the executed document as token of its acknowledgment.

Where the validity of a mutation was challenged by a person whose interests were at stake and stood compromised by the mutation in question, it was incumbent upon the beneficiaries to not only prove the validity and legality of the mutation by producing all relevant evidence but it was also necessary that the initial transaction leading up to the mutation should also be proved through cogent and reliable evidence.

A perusal of the written statement filed by the petitioners before the trial court reveals that no such details with regard to the transaction or for that matter sanctioning of mutation have been mentioned in the written statement and no evidence whatsoever was led to prove either of the issues.

C.R. No. 1074 D of 2010
Gul Muhammad, etc. Versus Zulifqar, etc