Suit for declaration and cancellation of sale mutations --- Fraud --- Sale of land --- Proof and burden of proof --- Petitioners claimed that the respondent - lady had .............

 2024 S C M R 178

MEHMOOD KHAN and others versus SARA AKHTAR ---

Civil Petition No. 3030 of 2021

Suit for declaration and cancellation of sale mutations --- Fraud --- Sale of land --- Proof and burden of proof --- Petitioners claimed that the respondent - lady had allegedly sold the suit land to them --- Respondent denied selling her land pursuant to the sale mutations or otherwise , and also denied receipt of sale consideration --- Counsel for respondent contended that the burden to establish the sale lay upon the beneficiaries of the sale , i.e. , the petitioners in terms of Article 115 of the Qanun - e - Shahadat , 1984 ; that respondent was not aware of the sale mutations and upon coming to learn of them filed the suit well within the period prescribed in the Limitation Act , 1908 ; that the respondent's lands were being looked after by her maternal uncle ( petitioner No. 7 ) , and as such she was in constructive possession thereof , which fact is further confirmed as she did not claim mesne profits in her suit ; that only one of the beneficiaries of the purported sale came forward to testify , that is petitioner No. 2 , who admittedly was a child at the time of the sale and as such could not have testified regarding facts thereof ; that his father (petitioner No.1) also testified but stated that the sale consideration was paid by his wife , who did not come forward to testify , and in not doing so an adverse presumption , in terms of Article 129 ( g ) of the Qanun - e - Shahadat , 1984 , would be drawn that if she had testified it would be that she had not paid the sale consideration --- Validity --- Contentions of the counsel representing the respondent were correct --- Furthermore , burden to establish the sales and the sale mutations , lay upon the beneficiaries thereof , i.e. the petitioners , but they failed to discharge it , and when the same was not discharged it may be stated to constitute fraud --- Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and the revenue authorities of the area were directed to immediately ensure delivery of subject land's exclusive possession to the respondent , as she was deprived of her land .