Bibi Sakina v. Haji Asmatullah,
YLR 2012 1454 · Balochistan High Court
This case involved a family dispute over property in Quetta known as Delite Cinema, which included shops and a hotel. The original plaintiff, Malik Rehmatullah, claimed he had been pressured into selling a portion of his jointly-owned property share to Haji Shaukat Ali after a dispute over stolen vehicles he had agreed to purchase on installments. He argued that a mutation entry (a change in land ownership records) made in 1997 and a later sale agreement from 1998 were the result of fraud, coercion and undue influence, and asked the court to cancel both. After his death, his heirs, the petitioners, continued the case. Both the trial court and the appellate court had dismissed the suit, finding it was filed too late and that the fraud and coercion claims were not proven. The petitioners then approached the Balochistan High Court.
The High Court upheld the lower courts' decisions and dismissed the case. It held that when someone claims a document was obtained through fraud or coercion, they must provide clear evidence showing exactly how they were threatened or influenced, not just make general allegations. The petitioners failed to explain the specific method by which their predecessor was supposedly pressured. The court also noted that co-owners of joint property can legally transfer their own share even before formal partition, undermining the claim that the transfer was invalid.
This case matters because it clarifies the strict evidentiary burden placed on parties alleging fraud or coercion in property transactions and confirms that partial owners have the right
یہ مقدمہ کوئٹہ میں واقع ڈیلائٹ سنیما کے نام سے مشہور جائیداد پر ایک خانگی تنازعہ سے متعلق تھا، جس میں دکانیں اور ایک ہوٹل شامل تھے۔ اصل مدعی، ملک رحمت اللہ، کا دعویٰ تھا کہ چوری شدہ گاڑیوں کے معاملے پر تنازعہ کے بعد، جنہیں اس نے قسطوں پر خریدنے کا معاہدہ کیا تھا، اسے دباؤ میں لا کر حاجی شوکت علی کے نام اپنی مشترکہ ملکیتی جائیداد کا ایک حصہ فروخت کرنے پر مجبور کیا گیا۔ اس کا مؤقف تھا کہ 1997 میں کی گئی انتقال کی اندراج (زمین کی ملکیت کے ریکارڈ میں تبدیلی) اور 1998 کا بعد میں ہونے والا معاہدہ فروخت دھوکہ دہی، جبر اور ناجائز اثر و رسوخ کا نتیجہ تھے، اور اس نے عدالت سے دونوں کو کالعدم قرار دینے کی درخواست کی۔ ان کی وفات کے بعد ان کے ورثاء، یعنی درخواست گزاران، نے مقدمہ جاری رکھا۔ نچلی عدالت اور اپیلی عدالت دونوں نے دعویٰ خارج کر دیا تھا، یہ قرار دیتے ہوئے کہ یہ مقدمہ بہت تاخیر سے دائر ک