AMIN-UD-DIN KHAN, J. --- Through this civil revision the petitioners have challenged the judgment and decree dated 21.1.2012 whereby the appeal filed by the petitioners was dismissed and the judgment and decree dated 27.9.2010 whereby the suit filed by the respondent was decreed.
2. The respondent filed a suit for declaration on 18.10.2009 claiming himself to be the owner of the suit land in the suit he challenged the validity of mutation No. 1331 attested on 25.9.2000 by defendant No. 2 Ghulam Rasool in favour of his son Bashir Ahmad allegedly being attorney of the plaintiff. The learned Trial Court after conclusion of trial decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff.
The appeal filed by the petitioners was dismissed.
3. When confronted to the learned counsel that even if the petitioner/defendant No. 1 be deemed to be the attorney of the plaintiff and even if it is admitted that in the power-of-attorney the power to gift the property is also available even then how gift of the property of the principal by the attorney in favour of his own son is valid and further that any attorney can gift the property on behalf of the principal, learned counsel for the petitioners is unable to satisfactorily respond this situation.
4. In my view the attorney cannot gift the property of the principal on behalf of the principal and if power to gift the property has been given in the attorney that can only be used to just implement the gift made by the principal himself in the revenue record and for the purpose of registration of document of gift, no attorney has the power to gift the property himself on behalf of the principal.
Furthermore in this case the alleged attorney has gifted the property of the principal in favour of his own son, this transaction cannot be said to be valid transaction from any stretch of imagination. In this view of the matter the Trial Court has rightly decreed the suit of the respondent/plaintiff and the first Appellate Court has dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioners/defendants, therefore, no case for interference by this Court under Section 115, CPC has been made out. In this view of the matter there is no force in this civil revision, which stands dismissed in limine.
Civil revision .