EJAZ AFZAL KHAN, C.J.--Petitioner through the instant petition has questioned the judgment and decree dated 12-3-2009 of the learned Additional District Judge-V, Mardan, whereby, he dismissed his appeal and maintained the judgment and decree dated 15-1-2008 of the learned Civil Judge- VIII, Mardan.
2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that the entire gamut of controversy was not considered either by the learned Trial Court or the learned Appellate Court while handing down the impugned judgments and that they being based on misreading and non- reading of evidence cannot be maintained.
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents by describing the background of the case nicely explained the origin of the title of each of the parties and the persons claiming through them but when he was asked to refer to evidence on the record, he couldn't do that because many of the relevant doucmetns have been brought on the record, though, he had them in his possession. When this being the state of things, I don't think that the Courts below have applied their minds while handing down the impugned judgments. I, therefore, don't feel inclined to maintain them.
4. For the reasons discussed above, this revision petition is allowed and the impugned judgments and decrees are set aside and the case is sent back to the learned Trial Court for decision afresh after recording additional evidence. Both the parties are directed to appear there on 31-3-2010.
Record of the case be sent there forthwith.