Oral Gift by the Plaintiff
SCMR 1373 SUPREME-COURT · Supreme Court of Pakistan
This case involved a property dispute between Mst. Azmat-e-Bibi and her step-brothers over agricultural land she had inherited from her father. The step-brothers claimed she had orally gifted the land to them, and this was recorded through a revenue mutation entry. She denied ever making such a gift and sued for a declaration that the mutation was invalid.
The trial court and the first appellate court both ruled against her, but the High Court, exercising its revisional powers, reversed those decisions, finding the gift mutation was not genuine. The step-brothers appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing the High Court had wrongly interfered with concurrent findings of two lower courts, which is generally not permitted in revisional jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the High Court's decision. It found that the step-brothers failed to produce credible evidence proving the plaintiff had actually made the gift or was even present when the mutation was attested. Key witnesses, like the person who supposedly identified her, were never examined, and the official who attested the mutation admitted he didn't personally know the parties. The Court also rejected the argument that a village council (Panchayat) had validated the gift, noting there was no proper evidence of this, and that asking someone to swear on the Holy Quran couldn't substitute for real evidence.
This case highlights that mere documentary entries in revenue records don't automatically prove a valid gift—courts require solid, credible evidence, and fraudulent transactions don't gain protection simply through the passage of time or official-
یہ مقدمہ مسماۃ عزت بی بی اور ان کے سوتیلے بھائیوں کے درمیان زرعی اراضی کے تنازع سے متعلق تھا، جو انہیں اپنے والد کی وراثت میں ملی تھی۔ سوتیلے بھائیوں کا دعویٰ تھا کہ انہوں نے زبانی طور پر یہ زمین ان کے حق میں ہبہ کر دی تھی، اور اس ہبہ کو ریونیو ریکارڈ میں انتقال کے ذریعے درج کیا گیا تھا۔ مسماۃ عزت بی بی نے کبھی ایسا ہبہ کرنے سے انکار کیا اور عدالت سے استدعا کی کہ اس انتقال کو کالعدم قرار دیا جائے۔
ٹرائل کورٹ اور پہلی اپیلیٹ عدالت، دونوں نے ان کے خلاف فیصلہ دیا، لیکن ہائی کورٹ نے اپنے نظرثانی (ریوژنل) اختیارات استعمال کرتے ہوئے ان فیصلوں کو کالعدم قرار دے دیا، اور یہ نتیجہ اخذ کیا کہ ہبہ کا انتقال حقیقی نہیں تھا۔ سوتیلے بھائیوں نے سپریم کورٹ میں اپیل دائر کی، اور یہ موقف اختیار کیا کہ ہائی کورٹ نے دو ماتحت عدالتوں کے متفقہ فیصلوں می