' JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, J.--- Mst. Ishrat Alia petitioner/ plaintiff and Hafiz Ayyub Ismail (respondent No,3) filed a suit seeking declaration of title and also prayed for cancellation of a power of attorney dated 6-12-1994 allegedly executed by Mst. Ishrat Alia in favour of Muhammad Akram (respondent No,2) and an exchange-deed dated 18-12-1994 executed by Muhammad Akram as attorney of Ishrat Alia in favour of Muhammad Ashraf deceased (respondent No,1) (now represented by his L.Rs,). It was alleged in the plaint that on 16-3-1983, Ishrat Alia had agreed to sell the suit-land to the respondent Hafiz Ayyub Ismail and had also delivered possession to him. It was further alleged that subsequently, the respondents Nos.1 and 2 fabricated the power of attorney mentioned above, and entered into the fraudulent exchange as recorded in the exchange-deed dated 18-12-1994. The L.Rs, of Muhammad Ashraf submitted a written statement in which they did not challenge the right of the petitioner to the decree prayed for by her. ..They, however, did mention that according to their information, some persons had obtained signatures from Muhammad. Ashraf deceased (respondent No,1).
2. At this paint, it may be added that the land originally owned by the petitioner Mst. Ishrat Alia was in Mauza Niaz Baig while the land purportedly taken by her in exchange which belongs to Muhammad Ashraf deceased (respondent No,1), was in Hanjarwal Chak No,31, Tehsil Pattoki. On 27- 4-2006 I had directed learned counsel for the petitioner to ascertain if the exchange-deed had been implemented in the Revenue Record and if so, whether any alienation had taken place in respect either of the two properties. Learned counsel has produced the copies of the Revenue Record to show, firstly that the exchange-deed was never entered in the Revenue Record and, secondly, that even otherwise the record shows that the original owners i,e, Mst. Ishrat Alia and Muhammad Ashraf continued to be shown as owners of their properties respectively in Mauza Niaz Baig and Hanjarwal, Chak No,31.
3. In view of the above-mentioned statements of respondents Nos.1 and 2, it follows that there is no outstanding dispute because Hafiz Ayub Ismail, who is the only other respondent and the petitioner Mst. Ishrat Alia as they are not in contention on any issue. Notwithstanding this situation, both Courts below have non-suited the petitioner-plaintiff on the short ground that Hafiz Ayub Ismail, who was a co-plaintiff, should have filed a suit for specific performance. Learned counsel contends that before the learned trial Court it was stated that cancellation of power of attorney and the exchange-deed dated 18-12-1994 was also being sought by the petitioner. Although relief to this extent should have been granted, the entire suit was dismissed.
4. It is clear from the record that the petitioner was entitled to cancellation of the power of attorney and the exchange-deed dated 18-12-1994. Her suit to this extent is, therefore, decreed. The third relief sought by the petitioner seeking specific performance has already been withdrawn by her through a statement made before the learned Appellate Court.
5. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the suit of the petitioner is decreed. As a result, the power of attorney dated 6-12-1994 and the exchange-deed dated 18-12-1994 are ordered to be cancelled.