' HAFIZ TARIQ NASIM, J.--- Brief facts leading to this civil revision are that the respondents Mst. Nusrat Begum etc. Filed a suit for possession 'through partition in the Court of Civil Judge, Kharian, the same was contested by the present petitioner and out of pleadings of the parties certain issues were framed; evidence was recorded; the suit was preliminary decreed in favour of Mst. Nusrat Javed etc. Through judgment and decree, dated 21-2- 2005. Aggrieved by this, the present petitioner filed appeal before the learned Additional District Judge, Kharian who vide judgment and decree, dated 26-10-2005 dismissed the appeal, confirmed the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge, which caused a serious prejudice to the petitioner who filed this civil revision.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned judgments are an outcome of misreading/non- reading of evidence available on record. Further submits that the learned trial Court failed to frame a very important issue regarding the construction raised by the petitioner upon the suit property and its effect and this omission of learned trial Court as well as of the learned Appellate Court, vitiates the entire proceedings. Adds that Issue No,9 was wrongly framed and both the learned Courts below did not apply their independent mind particularly on the point of gift and construction raised on the disputed property.
2. Whereas the learned counsel for the respondents supports the impugned judgments of both the Courts below.
3. Arguments heard; available record perused.
4. So far the non-framing of the issue on the point of gift or consideration raised on the disputed property by the learned Civil Judge is concerned, suffice it to say that the present petitioner could file an application before the learned Civil Judge or even before the learned Additional District Judge for the amendment of issues/adding of issues but admittedly this was not done and for the first time this objection is raised which cannot be entertained particularly in the revision and in this behalf reliance can be placed on a reported case Mushtaq Ahmad v. Abdul Haq 2008 YLR 904. Even the law is available on the point that, "issue if framed but allegations made in plaint challenged in written statement, evidence could be led over controversy". Reliance in this respect is placed on Province of East Pakistan v. Hassan Askari PLD 1971 SC 82.
5. So far the point of gift is concerned, law laid down in Ghulam Muhammad v. Muhammad Ramzan 2007 MLD 1769 can be referred which deals with the said proposition.
6. After hearing both the parties and perusal of record the concurrent findings recorded by the lower Courts below, I am not inclined to interfere in the present controversy in exercise of revisional powers under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 which otherwise are very limited as per law laid down by the apex Court in a number of cases. Accordingly, this civil revision is dismissed.