' SH. HAKIM ALI, J.---Through this civil revision, judgment and decree dated 11-4-2002 passed by learned Additional District Judge in Civil Appeal No.23 of 2001 instituted on 3111-2001 with the title of Muhammad Aslam and others v. Abdul Sattar has been challenged, which has upheld the judgment and decree dated 23-12-2000 passed by learned Civil Judge, Sheikhupura in a suit for specific performance of contract.
2. Facts, in brevity, are that Abdul Sattar, respondent had filed . a suit for specific performance of contract on the basis of an agreement to sell dated 8-11-1994 with regard to land measuring 21 Kanals, 10 Marlas, situated in village Kurlkay, District Sheikhupura, having allegedly been executed by Mst. Ghafooran Bibi, widow of Nimat Ali, in favour of Abdul Sattar. In the aforesaid plaint, it was specifically mentioned in para. No.3 by plaintiff that Mst.Ghafooran Bibi had expired and she had no male or female issue to.Inherit her property but defendants Aslam and Islamoo sons of Shadi Khan were proclaiming themselves as legal heirs of Mst. Ghafooran Bibi and were denying the right of the plaintiff to get the decree. This para. Was controverted by defendant with the plea that they were `shrai' heirs of Mst. Ghafooran Bibi and no agreement to sell as alleged was ever executed by Mst. Ghafooran Bibi in favour of Abdul Sattar, plaintiff. The suit was contested and thereafter, it was decreed on 23-12-2000 by learned, Civil Judge. Appeal preferred against that judgment and decree also met with the same fate. Hence, this civil revision.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners submits that an important issue was not framed with regard to the relationship of petitioners/defendants with Mst. Ghafooran Bibi.
According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, not. Only Aslam and Islamoo yet other legal heirs Mst. Jan Bibi was to be impleaded who was not arrayed in the list of defendants.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent submits that these petitioners and Mst. Jan Bibi were not legal heirs of Mst. Ghafooran Bibi and that Mutation No.454 sanctioned on 16-1-1995 was not depicting the true picture.
5. Therefore, an issue must have been framed with regard to the relationship of the defendants with Mst. Ghafooran Bibi before proceedings to decide the dispute of execution of alleged agreement to sell.
6. I have considered the arguments of both the learned counsel and have perused the record.
7. A material fact was raised by plaintiff in para. No.3 of his plaint, denying the relationship of defendants with Mst. Ghafooran Bibi and that fact was also controverted in the written statement.
Before proceedings with suit, it was necessary for. The learned Civil Judge to frame an issue with regard to this relationship ,and thereafter to proceed on the merits of the case. The failure to frame a material issue going to the root of the case requires remand of the instant case. Therefore, by accepting 1 this civil revision, the case is remanded to the learned trial Court to frame proper and correct issues, in accordance with the pleadings of the parties and to allow . The parties to produce their evidence. It may be noted that both the parties shall be at liberty to raise all the questions on which they rely for the decision of the case in their favour. With these observations, the civil revision is disposed of.