' MAULVI ANWARUL HAQ, J.---This case was decided by this Court vide judgment dated 12-11-2001.
The facts and the history of the case is stated in the said judgment and the correctness is not objected to by the learned counsel for the parties. The same need not be reproduced here. The judgment was appealed against and the appeal was allowed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan on 28-8-2006 as follows:--- "4. Accordingly, we convert this petition into appeal and allow the same. Judgment of the High Court is set aside' and the matter is remanded for fresh decision after first deciding the application for additional evidence."
The application referred to in the said judgment is C.M.No,1859/91.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that it has throughout been the case of the petitioners that the land had, in fact, not been allotted to the respondents. Already both the parties have placed on record copies of the Register Haqdaran Zamin for the year 1972-73. The petitioner has obtained copy of the same document from the office of the Saddar Qanungo, Gujrat and there is no mention of the allotment in the same. He, therefore, prays 'that the said certified copy be compared with the document Exh.P.1 and D.3 already produced on record by both the parties.
Learned counsel for the respondents opposes the prayer with the contention that the document ought to have been produced in the course of trial or first appeal. He points out that notwithstanding the said pleadings as referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner, no issue was framed. According to him, the question of limitation/extinguishments of mortgage should also be left open to be decided along with the said question if this Court deems it proper, to allow the prayer in the application.
3. I have examined the file of the civil revision, with the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties. I do find that it has been categorically stated in the plaint that the suit-land i.e, Khasra No,1040 Min measuring 18 Kanals 8 Marlas has not been allotted to the respondents. Whereas the case of the respondents is that the land was allotted to them as maintenance allowance, they being J&K refugees. I further find that no issue arising out of the said pleadings was framed by the learned trial Court. I also find that whereas in Exh. P.1 and Exh.D.3 against the suit-land Central Government has been recorded as mortgagor of occupancy rights while Mst. Jewni is recorded as mortgagee, there is a mention that Begum Bibi is the temporary allottee. However, in the additional document, which is marked as "A" there is no mention of any allotment. It, therefore, needs to be determined after framing an appropriate issue as to whether the suit-land has been lawfully allotted to the respondents. The question of extinguishment of the equity of redemption will also be re-decided accordingly. The civil revision is allowed. Both the impugned judgments and decrees are set aside. The parties shall appear before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Gujrat, on 4-12-2007.
He will, in the first instance, frame the following:- "8-A. Whether the suit-land stands allotted to the defendants Nos.2 to 5?OPD."
' Issue No,9 will be re-framed as follows:- "9. If issue No,8-A is proved, ' whether the allotment in favour of the defendants is illegal and void for the reasons stated in para-3 of the plaint? OPP."
4. The office shall send the document marked as "A" to the learned trial Court along with the copy of this judgment. It will be admitted in evidence. The defendants shall be given a chance to lead evidence in support of the said issue No,8-A and to rebut the said document. Thereafter, the suit shall be decided afresh after considering the entire evidence on record. No orders as to costs.