1999 Y L R 2209

[Lahore]
Before Nazir Ahmad Siddiqui, J
ASHIQ HSSAIN !!!"e#i#io$er
%er&u&
ALI AH'A( #hrou)h Le)a* Heir& a$d a$o#her!!!Re&+o$de$#&
Civil Revision No.1951-D of 1986, decided on 11th June, 1999.
,a- .ra$&fer of "ro+er#/ A0# ,I1 of 1222-!!!
----Ss. 122 & 126---Liit!tion "ct #$% of 19&8', "(t. 91---)ift---Revoc!tion---Liit!-
tion---$f delive(* of +ossession h!d t!,en +l!ce in -ift t(!ns!ction, (evoc!tion of such -ift
.!s +e(issi/le onl* /* e!ns of ! dec(ee of ! Cou(t---Suit fo( (evoc!tion of -ift !fte(
delive(* of +ossession ust /e -ove(ned /* "(t. 91, Liit!tion "ct, 19&8, +(ovidin-
th(ee *e!(s fo( filin- ! suit fo( settin- !side o( c!ncell!tion of !n* inst(uent---)ift .!s
!de in 1962 .he(e!s suit fo( (evoc!tion .!s filed /* the dono( in 1908 !fte( !/out
si1teen *e!(s of e1ecution of -ift deed---Suit filed /* dono( .!s li!/le to /e disissed
/ein- /!((ed /* tie---2!(e solit!(* st!teent of dono( of h!vin- /ecoe !.!(e of -ift !
fe. d!*s /efo(e institution of suit, .!s not !cce+t!/le .hen +ossession of suit l!nd h!d
/een +!ssed to the donee unde( the -ift lon- tie /!c,.
3st. L!l 2i/i v. N!.!/ 3!su "li 4h!n 58 $C 096 #7udh'8 R!ch!nd(! Jiv!9i 4!n!-o
!nd !nothe( v. L!1!n Sh(iniv!s N!i, !nd !nothe( "$R 1965 :C 2558 3uh!!d S!di;
4h!n !nd othe(s v. 3uh!!d S!lee 4h!n !nd othe(s 1985 3LD 16068 3uh!!d
",(! v. 4!,! :LD 1900 L!h. 1560 !nd Sh!sh!d "li Sh!h !nd othe(s v. S*ed <!ss!n
Sh!h !nd othe(s :LD 1966 SC 165 (ef.
,3- Limi#a#io$ A0# ,I4 of 1902-!!!
----"(t. 12&---Liit!tion "ct, 19&8 .!s so e1h!ustive th!t no !ct o( !ction .hich could
/e t!,en note of, .!s oitted !nd fo( c!ses=suits .hich did not f!ll unde( s+ecific
c!te-o(*, (esidu!(* "(t. 12& h!d /een inco(+o(!ted.
,0- .ra$&fer of "ro+er#/ A0# ,I1 of 1222-!!!
----Ss. 122 & 126---)ift---Revoc!tion---$t .!s Jud-e=>!?i .ho .ould t!,e note of !nd
e1+l!in ci(cust!nces unde( .hich ! dec(ee could /e +!ssed (evo,in- -ift.
,d- 5i%i* "ro0edure 5ode ,1 of 1902-!!!
----S.115---$n vie. of !te(i!l i((e-ul!(ities !nd ille-!lities of "++ell!te Cou(t /elo. in
(eve(sin- 9ud-ent of @(i!l Cou(t, 9ud-ent !nd dec(ee of "++ell!te Cou(t /elo. .e(e
set !side in (evision!l 9u(isdiction.
3st. L!l 2i/i v. N!.!/ 3!su "li 4h!n 58 $C 096 #7udh' (ef.
3uh!!d "sl! Sindhu fo( :etitione(.
Nus(!t All!h 3i!n fo( Res+ondents.
D!te of he!(in-B 0th June, 1999.
J(6'7N.
@he +l!intiff, "li "h!d #he(ein!fte( c!lled the (es+ondent No. 1' instituted ! suit fo(
+ossession of the suit l!nd #det!iled in the +l!int' !-!inst the +(esent +etitione( !nd t.o
othe(s, no. the (es+ondents Nos.2 !nd 5. $t h!s /een !lle-ed in the +l!int th!t he /ein-
the o.ne( of the suit l!nd, ent(usted its !n!-eent to the +etitione( .ho .!s ! (el!tive
of his second .ife, 3st. <!9(!n 2i/i. $t .!s fu(the( !lle-ed in the +l!int th!t -(eed
+(ev!iled u+on the (es+ondent No. 1, .ho -ot the. suit l!nd f(!udulentl* t(!nsfe((ed in his
n!e, vide ! 3ut!tion of )ift No.298 !ttested on 9-5-1962. <e ch!llen-ed the s!id
ut!tion in the *e!( 1905, /* e!ns of ! decl!(!to(* suit, /ut !fte( f(!in- of the issues
!nd !dducin- evidence /* the +!(ties, the le!(ned Civil Jud-e, vide his o(de(, d!ted 15-5-
1908, (e9ected the +l!int, unde( 7(de( C$$, Rule 11, C.:.C. $t .!s held th!t ! suit see,in-
! e(e decl!(!tion .ithout !n* +(!*e( fo(, +ossession of the suit l!nd is not !int!in!/le
in vie. of the +(oviso to section 62 of the S+ecific Relief "ct. Soon !fte( the +!ssin- of
the !fo(es!id o(de(, (es+ondent No. l filed the +(esent suit.
2. @he suit .!s veheentl* contested !nd the follo.in- issues .e(e f(!ed /* the
le!(ned Civil Jud-e B--
#1' Dhethe( the +l!intiff h!d not -ifted the suit l!nd to defend!nt No.1 !nd !ll the
+(oceedin-s (e-!(din- the !lle-ed -ift !(e /!sed u+on f(!udE 7::.
#2' Dhethe( the +l!intiff h!s (evo,ed the dis+uted -ift, if so, its effectE 7::.
#5' Dhethe( the suit is .ithin tieE 7::.
#6' Dhethe( the desc(i+tion of the suit l!nd is inco((ect, if so, its effectE 7:D.
#5' Dhethe( the defend!nts Nos.2 !nd 5 !(e not necess!(* +!(ties to the suit, if so, its
effectE 7:D.
#6' Dhethe( the +l!intiff h!s no c!use of !ctionE 7:D.
#0' Dhethe( the defend!nt No. l h!s +e(fected his title /* !dve(se +ossession fo( ! +e(iod
of ove( 12 *e!(sE 7:D.
#8' Dhethe( the suit is, /!((ed /* +(inci+les of (es 9udic!t!E 7:D.
#9' Dhethe( the +l!intiff is esto++ed /* his o.n conduct f(o filin- this suitE 7:D.
#1&' Relief.
5. @he +!(ties h!ve led evidence in su++o(t of thei( (es+ective !sse(tions !nd !fte(
+e(usin- the s!e !nd !++(eci!tin- the !(-uents of the le!(ned counsel fo( the +!(ties,
the le!(ned Civil Jud-e, vide his 9ud-ent !nd dec(ee, d!ted 15-1-1985, disissed the
suit of the (es+ondent No. 1, ho.eve(, on !n !++e!l, +(efe((ed /* hi, the le!(ned
"ddition!l Dist(ict8 Jud-e, Shei,hu+u(!, set !side the s!id 9ud-ent !nd dec(ee, !nd
conse;uentl* dec(eed the suit.
6. @he +etitione( h!s ch!llen-ed the !fo(es!id 9ud-ent !nd dec(ee of the le!(ned
"ddition!l Dist(ict Jud-e, th(ou-h the +(esent (evision +etition.
5. 7nl* the findin-s on $ssues Nos.2 !nd 5 .e(e !ss!iled !s on the /!sis the(eof, the
le!ned "ddition!l Dist(ict Jud-e h!s dec(eed the suit of (es+ondent No. 1.
6. @he le!(ned counsel fo( the +etitione( !(-ued th!t /oth the Cou(ts h!ve concu((entl*
held on $ssue No. l th!t the i+u-ned -ift .!s v!lid !s !ll the necess!(* in-(edients of !
-ift i.e. decl!(!tion, !cce+t!nce, delive(* of +ossession, !(e !v!il!/le in f!vou( of the
+etitione(, /ut the le!(ned "ddition!l Dist(ict Jud-e h!s (eve(sed the findin-s of le!(ned
t(i!l Cou(t on $ssues Nos. 2 !nd 5, on .(on- +(eises of l!. !nd f!cts. @he suit .!s
+!tentl* tie-/!((ed #"(ticle 91 of Liit!tion "ct' !nd (es+ondent No. $ could not h!ve
(evo,ed the -ift in ;uestion, !s the s!e, .!s v!lid, le-!ll* !nd f!ctu!ll*, !nd (es+ondent
No. 1 hiself !++e!(ed /efo(e the Revenue 7ffice( !nd -ot t(!nsfe((ed the suit l!nd .ith
his f(ee .ill !nd consent. $n su++o(t of his !(-uents, he (efe((ed to the follo.in-
9ud-entsB-
58 $C 096 #7udh' #3st. L!l 2i/i v. N!.!/ 3!su "li 4h!n'8 "$R 1965 :C 255
#R!ch!nd(! Jiv!9i 4!n!-o !nd !nothe( v. L!1!n Sh(iniv!s N!i, !nd !nothe('8 1985
3LD 1606 #3uh!!d S!di; 4h!n etc. v. 3uh!!d S!lee 4h!n, !nd othe(s'8 :LD
1900 L!h. 1560 #3uh!!d ",(! v. 4!,!'8 :LD 1966 SC 165 #Sh!sh!d "li Sh!h
!nd othe(s v. S*ed <!ss!n Sh!h !nd othe(s'.
0. Dhe(e!s, the le!(ned counsel fo( the (es+ondent No.1 !(-ued th!t the (es+ondent No. l
h!d -ot his o.n child(en !nd -(!ndchild(en, !nd thus, the(e .!s no occ!sion fo( !n* -ift
in f!vou( of the +etitione(. <e st(on-l* !(-ued .ith (efe(ence to +!(!.=section 160 of the
3uh!!den L!. #/* 3ull!' th!t dono( !* (evo,e the -ift !t !n* tie even !fte(
delive(* of the +ossession of the suit l!nd. <e fu(the( !(-ued th!t the c!se of the +etitione(
does not f!ll .ithin the e1ce+tions inco(+o(!ted in the s!id +!(!. =section. <e (e+e!ted his
!(-uents .ith veheence th!t no liit!tion (uns in c!se of (evoc!tion of ! -ift !nd
"(ticle 91 of the Liit!tion "ct !s su--ested /* the le!(ned counsel fo( the +etitione(
c!nnot /e !de !++lic!/le to the f!cts of the inst!nt c!se.
8. $ h!ve -iven due conside(!tion to the !(-uents of the le!(ned counsels fo( the +!(ties.
"s f!( !s the $ssue No.5 .ith (e-!(d to the Liit!tion, $ ! convinced to hold th!t the suit
.!s tie-/!((ed, !s Liit!tion "ct +(ovides fo( !ll the "cts co+l!ined of, ! s+ecified
+e(iod to initi!te !n !ction in ! Cou(t of L!.. 4ee+in- in vie. the !fo(es!id 9ud-ents
cited /* the le!(ned counsel fo( the +etitione(, $ ! cle!( in * ind th!t "(ticle 91 of the
Liit!tion "ct is full* !++lic!/le to the inst!nt c!se. No dou/t, the suit h!s /een f(!ed
!s ! suit fo( the (ecove(* of the +ossession of the suit l!nd, /ut !t the s!e tie ! (e!din-
of the +l!int su--ests th!t (es+ondent No.1 intends to -et the i+u-ned ut!tion
c!ncelled, set !side, o( (evo,ed. $t is in +!(!.=section 160 of the 3uh!!den L!. #/*
D.F. 3ull!' th!t, G! -ift !* /e (evo,ed /* the dono( !t !n* tie /efo(e the delive(* of
+ossessionG. 2ut, !s +e( its su/section #2', Gsu/9ect to the +(ovision of su/section #6' !
-ift !* /e (evo,ed even !fte( delive(* of +ossession e1ce+t in ! fe. ce(t!in c!ses, !nd
su/section #6' l!*s do.n th!t Gonce +ossession is delive(ed nothin- sho(t of ! dec(ee of
the -Cou(t is sufficient to (evo,e the -ift. Neithe( ! decl!(!tion of (evoc!tion /* the
dono(, no( even the institution of ! suit fo( (esuin- the -ift is sufficient to (evo,e the
-iftG. @hus, it is cle!( f(o the l!n-u!-e of the !/ove section th!t ! -ift !* /e (evo,ed !t
!n* tie /efo(e the delive(* of ! +ossession i.e. no liit!tion is !v!il!/le. 2ut if the.
delive(* of, the +ossession h!s t!,en +l!ce then the (evoc!tion is +e(issi/le onl* /*
e!ns of ! dec(ee of ! Cou(t !nd fo( the +u(+ose the .o(d H !t !n* tieH h!s not /een
entioned, e!nin- the(e/*, fo( (evoc!tion, !fte( delive(* of +ossession, ! suit ust /e
-ove(ned /* soe "(ticle of the Liit!tion "ct, !nd !s $ o/se(ved !/ove, the !fo(es!id
9ud-ents cited /* the le!(ned counsel fo( the +etitione( su++o(t the vie. th!t "(ticle 91
of the Liit!tion "ct is !++lic!/le, .hich +(ovides ! +e(iod of th(ee *e!(s fo( filin- ! suit
fo( settin- !side o( c!ncell!tion of !n* inst(uent, in this c!se, i+u-ned ut!tion of.
-ift, .hich .!s s!nctioned on 9-5-1962 !nd the suit filed on 29-6-1908, .!s +!tentl*
tie-/!((ed. @his !s+ect /ecoes o(e si-nific!nt !s /oth the Cou(ts /elo. h!ve
concu((entl* held th!t the i+u-ned -ift .!s v!lidl* !de in +etitione(Hs f!vou( !nd it
.!s !lso found th!t +ossession of the suit l!nd h!s /een +!ssed to the +etitione( unde(
-ift. 2!(e solit!(* st!teent of (es+ondent No.1 of h!vin- /ecoe !.!(e of -ift ! fe.
d!*s /efo(e institution of suit, is not !cce+t!/le in the ci(cust!nces. Res+ondent No. 1,
/ein- !.!(e of e1istence of inst(uent in the sh!+e of ! ut!tion f(o the d!te of its
e1ecution /ound to h!ve h!d -ift set !side +(eliin!(* to his t!,in- +ossession of suit
l!nd !nd in this set of ci(cust!nces, "(ticle 91 is full* !++lic!/le. $ c!nnot !-(ee .ith
the contention of the le!(ned counsel fo( the (es+ondent No. l th!t the(e is no liit!tion
fo( (evoc!tion of ! -ift !fte( delive(* of +ossession. Liit!tion "ct is so e1h!ustive th!t
no !ct o( !ction .hich could /e t!,en note of !s f!( !s #hu!nl* +ossi/le' .!s oitted
!nd the c!ses=suits .hich do not f!ll unde( !n* s+ecific c!te-o(*, the (esidu!(* "(ticle
12& h!s /een inco(+o(!ted. $f .e t!,e it !s ! si+le suit fo( +ossession, fo( .hich !
liit!tion of 12 *e!(s is +(esc(i/ed unde( "(ticles 162 !nd 166 of the Liit!tion "ct,
even then the suit .!s tie-/!((ed. :ossession unde( -ift h!s /een -iven in the *e!( 1962,
!nd the inst!nt suit .!s filed on 29-6-1908. @he le!(ned counsel fo( the (es+ondent No. 1
h!s +ointed out th!t !n !++lic!tion unde( section 16 of the Liit!tion "ct, h!s !lso /een
oved !lon-.ith the suit. @o e, th!t !++lic!tion .!s isconceived !nd +e(us!l of
(eco(d sho.s th!t even th!t !++lic!tion h!s /een .ithd(!.n du(in- the +(oceedin-s of the
inst!nt suit. @hus, seen f(o !n* !n-le, the suit of the (es+ondent No.1 .!s li!/le to /e
disissed on the +oint of liit!tion !lone.
9. No., $ coe to $ssue No.2 .hich is !-!in (e+(oduced !s unde(B--
GDhethe( the +l!intiff h!s (evo,ed the dis+uted -ift, if so, its effectE 7::. G
1&. $t is .o(th to /e noted th!t the enti(e evidence /(ou-ht on (eco(d .!s to sho. th!t the
i+u-ned -ift h!s /een !de in ! cl!ndestine !nne(, thus, the s!e .!s li!/le to /e
decl!(ed !s such, .hich is evident f(o the .o(din-s of $ssue No.1. 2ut, /oth the le!(ned
Cou(ts /elo. !(e un!nious to -ive ! findin- on this issue i.e. $ssue No. 1 !-!inst the
(es+ondent No. 1. @hen, .h!t is left in the evidence. @he (es+ondent No.1 in +!(!. 5 of
the +l!int .(itesB
$n his st!teent !s :D 2, he s!id B
"nd, the "ddition!l Dist(ict Jud-e h!s -iven his (esult in +!(!. 1& of the i+u-ned
9ud-ent. G$, the(efo(e, hold th!t the filin- of the suit, itself, is ! sufficient decl!(!tion
!nd the s!e .!s !lso (e-!ffi(ed /* the !++ell!nt #+(esent (es+ondent No. 1' in his
testion* in Cou(t !nd, thus, findin-s on $ssue No.2 !(e (eve(sedG. @hus it h!s /een held
in +!(!. 15 of the i+u-ned 9ud-ent, Gin vie. of findin-s on $ssue No.2. $ !cce+t this
!++e!l, to the e1tent th!t the !++ell!nt is entitled to -et ! dec(ee th!t the -ift h!s /een
(evo,edG. @his findin- of the le!(ned "ddition!l Dist(ict Jud-e c!nnot /e le-!ll*
sust!ined !s it is the dec(ee of the Cou(t .hich !* (evo,e ! -ift !nd it is not !n !/solute
(i-ht of the dono( to cl!i th!t he (evo,ed the -ift !nd he /e, thus, decl!(ed entitled to -et
! dec(ee th!t he h!d (evo,ed the -ift. $t is the Jud-e=>!?i .ho .ill t!,e note of !nd
e1+l!in the ci(cust!nces unde( .hich ! dec(ee !* /e +!ssed (evo,in- -ift. $n this
conte1t $ find su++o(t f(o the 9ud-ent 58 $C 096 #7udh' #3st. L!l 2i/i v. N!.!/
3!su "li 4h!n'B GAnde( the <!nfi L!. (evoc!tion of ! -ift c!nnot /e +e(itted unless
the dono( !,es out ! -ood c!se, !nd it .ill not /e +e(itted if the .ish to (evo,e !s !
(esult of e(e .hi o( loss of te+eG.
11. $n this c!se, !s o/se(ved e!(lie(, the (es+ondent No.1 ende!vou(ed h!(d to -et
decl!(ed the i+u-ned ut!tion void on the /!sis of f(!ud. 2ut on his f!ilu(e to -et it
done, he, /* e!ns of !n !lte(n!tive +le!, too, (efu-e unde( the -!(/ of (evoc!tion .hich,
in the -iven ci(cust!nces, he c!nnot. $ !s,ed the le!(ned counsel fo( the (es+ondent
No.1, to e1+l!in .h!t h!s ,e+t hi silent since 1962 to 1908. <e s!id it .!s not 1908, /ut
fo( the fi(st tie, he ch!llen-ed the -ift in the *e!( 1905, /* e!ns of ! civil suit, .hich
h!s ulti!tel* /een et .ith f!ilu(e !s the +l!int h!d /een (e9ected. "nd seen f(o th!t
!n-le, even th!t suit .!s filed !fte( ! +e(iod of 11 *e!(s. @he le!(ned counsel fo(
(es+ondent No. l h!s !lso su/itted th!t initi!ll*, the +etitione( h!d /een -ivin- H 2!t!iH to
(es+ondent No. 1, /ut .hen he !lle-edl*, sto++ed +!*in- the s!e, then it c!e to the
,no.led-e of the (es+ondent No. l th!t f(!ud h!s /een #!lle-edl* coitted'. 2ut, this
contention c!nnot /e sust!ined on the /!sis of solit!(* st!teent of (es+ondent No.1 !s
:.D.2. No evidence, .h!tsoeve(, h!s /een led th!t H2!t!iH h!s eve( /een +!id to hi /* the
+etitione(. :!(ticul!(l*, .hen he !lle-ed in the +l!int th!t, Gdefend!nt No.2 #no. the
(es+ondent No.2' 3uh!!d "sh(!f .!s occu+*in- the suit l!nd !s ! ten!nt G@he
i+u-ned ut!tion h!s /een dul* inco(+o(!ted in the HJ!! 2!ndiesH #(eco(d of (i-hts' in
f!vou( of the +etitione( .ho h!s /een in +ossession of the suit l!nd unde( the -ift since
1962, !nd !s o/se(ved e!(lie(, it c!n h!(dl* /e /elieved th!t the (es+ondent No.1 .!s not
!.!(e of th!t, +!(ticul!(l* .hen /oth the Cou(ts h!ve concu((entl* held the -ift .!s v!lid
one !nd (es+ondent No.1 ise(!/l* f!iled to +(ove th!t -ift .!s !de in his !/sence o(
th(ou-h deceitful e!ns. <is +(esence .!s dul* !(,ed in the i+u-ned ut!tion of -ift
.hich h!s /een found co((ect. No., the (es+ondent No. 1 c!nnot /*+!ss the s!e. @hus,
the findin- of the te!ed "ddition!l Dist(ict Jud-e in this /eh!lf, !lso suffe(s f(o le-!l
!nd f!ctu!l infi(ities.
11. Fo( .h!t h!s /een st!ted !/ove $ ! of the conside(ed o+inion th!t the le!(ned
"ddition!l Dist(ict Jud-e, .hile (eve(sin- the 9ud-ent !nd dec(ee of the le!(ned t(i!l
Cou(t, h!s coitted !te(i!l i((e-ul!(it* !nd ille-!lit*. @his /ein- so, the i+u-ned
9ud-ent !nd dec(ee of the le!(ned "ddition!l Dist(ict Jud-e !(e set !side /* !llo.in-
this (evision +etition, le!vin- the +!(ties to /e!( thei( o.n costs.
<. 2. @.="-151=L
Re%i&io$ +e#i#io$ a**o8ed9