QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.---Ahmed Bukhsh, predecessor-in-interest, pre-empted sale through mutation dated 14.9.1999, asserting his superior right of being a co-sharer in the estate; Ameer Ali, vendee/respondent, contested the Suit, decreed by the trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 7.1.2000, a finding maintained by the Appellate Court, however , reversed by the High Court vide judgment dated 28.10.2013, for failure to perform Talabs in accordance with law , vires whereof are being impugned through this right appeal.
2. The High Court recapitulated plaintif f's evidence regarding performance of Talabs and found it fraught with contradictions, discrepancies and impro vements to arrive at a conclusion that Talabs were not performed in accordance with law .
3. With the assistance of learned counsel for the appellants, we have examined the record. Notice (Ex.PW -5/1), purportedly issued by the plaintif f sans reference to Khalid (PW-5), a witness produced to prove Talab-i-Ishhad; he surfaced for the first time on 14.5.2009 to depose that he along with the plaintif f was present in a Baithak when Hameedullah (PW-3) disclosed the factum of sale; Hameedullah when himself examined remained silent, conspicuously omitted any such encounter with Khalid PW. Witnesses are also discrepant on other relevant details regarding time and manner , the Talabs were made; contradictions are such in nature that stance taken by one witness cannot be accepted without first excluding the others' and vice versa; the High Court has been justified to exclude their statements from consideration and, on our own independent analys is, conclusion being irresistible, we have not been able to persuade ourselves to take a contra view . Appeal fails. Dismissed.