' TASSADUQ HUSSAIN JILLANI, J.---Petitioner's suit for cancellation of mutation No, 1157, dated 9.1.1983 as also for possession and permanent injunction was decreed by the learned Trial Court in terms of the judgment and decree dated 11.11.2000, which judgment and decree was reversed in appeal by the learned Additional District Judge vide the judgment dated 11.10.2001 primarily on the basis of its finding on issues No, 5 & 6. The said judgment and decree has been upheld by the learned High Court in dismissing petitioner's civil revision.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave on the ground that the Courts below have not appreciated that mutation by itself is not a title of document; that independent evidence was not required to prove the transaction of sale reflected in the said mutation which was not done and that the concurrent judgments are violative of the law laid down by this Court in Muhammad Akram v. Altaf Ahmed (PLD 2003 SC 688).
3. We have considered the submissions made and have gone through the evidence with the assistance of learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. Admittedly the petitioner/plaintiff had earlier on filed a suit for cancellation of agreement to sell Ex.D1 with regard to the suit land which was dismissed by the learned Trial Court (Ex.D9) vide the judgment dated 30.11.1992 and appeal filed by the petitioner/plaintiff against the said judgment was withdrawn on 15.1.1997 vide Ex.D12. It is not denied that in terms of the afore-mentioned agreement Ex.D1 the possession of the suit property had been delivered to the respondent/defendant. Learned counsel for the petitioner/ plaintiff has not referred to any piece of evidence through which it could be proved that the transaction reflected in the impugned mutation was fraudulent and even otherwise no particulars of the fraud were spelt out even in the plaint. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also not pointed out any misreading or non-reading of evidence which could have persuaded this Court to interfere in the concurrent judgments and decrees.
5. In the afore-referred circumstances, we do not find any merit in this petition, which is dismissed and . High Court Judgment Upheld/.