' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.---This petition calls in question the judgment, dated 16th August 2001 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore whereby Civil Revision filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.
2. Precisely stating the facts of the case necessary for disposal of instant petitioner are that petitioner Mst. Bilqees Mai instituted a suit for declaration of ownership of the articles/properties mentioned in Columns Nos.13 to 16 of Nikahnama Exh.P/1 on the averments that respondent No,1 being father of her husband respondent No,2, at the time of Nikah between the parties took the responsibility for satisfying her claim of the dower against the articles and the properties mentioned in columns Nos.13 to 16 in Nikahnama which includes residential/ agricultural property owned by respondent No, 1 . The respondent contested the suit. Meanwhile he also filed a suit against the petitioner for declaration on the ground that the alleged entries in Nikahnama are the result of fraud, therefore, he is not bound to satisfy her claim. Both the suits were consolidated and issues arising out of pleadings of the parties were framed, evidence so led by them in respect of their respective contentions was recorded and the learned trial Court vide consolidated judgment, dated 23rd February, 1999 dismissed the suit of the petitioner and decreed the suit of the respondent No, 1 . Petitioner preferred two appeals, which were also dismissed by learned Additional District Judge, vide judgment, dated 24-7-2001. Being dissatisfied from the judgments of the trial as well as Appellate Courts the petitioner preferred revision petitions, which had been dismissed by means of the impugned judgment.
3. It may be noted that the learned trial Court as well as Appellate Court on having gone through the material available on record concluded that the entries in Columns Nos.13 to 16 in Nikahnama Exh.P/1 are forged. Learned High Court did not interfere in such findings of fact in exercise of jurisdiction under section 115, C.P.C.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that respondent No,1 had affixed his thumb impression on Nikahnama Exh.P.1 in front of columns Nos.13 to 16 of Exh.P.1 (Nikahnama) which furnishes proof of the fact that he has bound down himself to satisfy .The claim of dower of petitioner against the property mentioned therein. The learned High Court as well as Courts below without attending this aspect of the case have non-suited the petitioner without any legal justification.
5. On the other hand learned counsel for the caveator stated that entries in the Nikahnama were forged subsequent to the Nikah between the parties, as manipulation is apparent from the record of the case.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the impugned judgment. It may be noted that for our perusal petitioner's counsel also produced original Nikahnama through Nikah Khawan. A perusal whereof clearly indicates that there is manipulation in the entries of columns Nos.13 to 16 of Exh.P/1 (Nikahnama), therefore, in such view of the matter we are of the opinion that the Courts below have rightly non-suited the petitioner by recording concurrent findings of facts.
' Thus for the foregoing reasons we see no merit in this petition, which is accordingly dismissed and leave refused. <