Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD AKRAM VS Respondent: Mst. ABIDA SULTANA And Other
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry, Syed Usman Ali Shah Title: MUHAMMAD AKRAM vs Mst. ABIDA SULTANA And Other Case No.: Civil Petition No.464-R of 1988 Civil Revision No.1661-D of 1988 Date of Judgment:1990-02-11 Reported As: 1991 SCMR 1562 Result: Petition dismissed
Judgment ORDER ABDUL QADEER CHAUDHRY, J.---The petitioner was married to respondent No.1 on 19-9-1971. The marriage ended in divorce in 1983. The petitioner riled an ejectment application against respondents Nos.2 and 3. The learned Rent Controller decided the ejectment application in favour of the petitioner on 8-11-1982. The appeal of the respondents Nos.2 and 3 was dismissed by the Additional District Judge on 16-8-1983. On 18-2-1984 the respondent No.1 filed a suit for a declaration claiming that she is the owner of house in dispute and that ejectment order in respect of suit house was not binding on her and, she also prayed for permanent injunction restraining the petitioner from seeking possession of the suit house. The suit was contested by the petitioner. On 3- 11-1985 the trial Court decreed the suit. The petitioner filed an appeal in the Court of District Judge, Faisalabad. His appeal was accepted and the case was remanded to the trial Court. On remand, the trial Court recorded evidence and the suit was dismissed on 29-11-1987 The respondents filed an appeal which was accepted by the Additional District Judge on 16-7-1988. The petitioner filed a revision petition in the High Court which was also dismissed. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner had not gifted the house in dispute to the respondent No.1, therefore, the finding of the Additional District Judge and the High Court is contrary to record, 3. The Nikahnama was exhibited at Ex.D-1. We find that in column 17 it has been specifically stated that the petitioner had given bungalow No.102, Jinnah Colony, Lyallpur, to his wife Mst. Abida Sultana. There is nothing contrary on the record to substantiate the contention. The contention was considered by the High Court and the finding of the learned appellate Court was not found to be suffering from any misreading or ignorance of evidence before it.
---
## Page 2
4. No point of law is involved in the petition. The petition has no force. Leave to appeal is refused and the petition is dismissed.