MUHAMMAD AMEER BHA TTI, J.--- This revision petition impugns concurre nt findings of fact recorded by both the learned Courts below dated 05.12.2008 and 08.10.2009 whereby the suit and appeal Bled by the petitioners stood dismissed.
2. In a suit for declaration with consequential relief, filed against respondents/defendants, it was claimed that the predecessor-in-interest of petitioners namely Rasheed-ud-Din gifted his owned land orally in favour of petitioners/plaintif fs and acknowledged the same by executing I amleeknama but contrary to that inheritance mutation No.979 dated 28.08.1994 was got sanctioned by defendants in favour of all the collaterals including the petitioners. The suit was contested by respondents/defendants by filing written statement. Out of divergent pleadings of the parties, issues were framed and the predecessor of plaintif fs/petitioners led his evidence, however , none appeared on behalf of defendants/respondents to record their evidence, who at one stage of proceedings were proceeded against exparte and after hearing exparte arguments, the suit of the petitioners was dismissed and appeal whereof also met with same fate.
3. Although both the learned Courts below after examining record of case decided factual position holding that the petitioners failed to prove the factum of gift as required by law through their elaborated judgments, however , the petitioners' counsel, when confronted with the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in a case reported as Mst.
Saadia v. Mst. Gul Bibi (2016 SCMR 662) wherein beneficiary of gift has been desired to prove its basic/essential ingredients offer, acceptance and handing over possession by leading direct confidence inspiring evidence he tried to wriggle out of the situation but failed. It is expedient to reproduce the relevant Para of this judgment for ready reference:-- "----Gift deed, authenticity of ---Prerequisites for valid gift i.e. "offer" "acceptance" and "delivery of possession" not proved --Nonexamin ation of attesting witnesses of -gift deeds--Interested witnesses presented to prove execution of purported gift deeds--Non-production of original gift deeds along with the plaint---Evidence of Hand Writing Expert not helpful in circumstances where Photostat copies of purported gift deeds were used for comparing signatures--Possibility of -manipulation/substitution/subsequent addition of attesting witnesses could not be ruled out---Gift deeds could not be termed as valid in such circumstances".
4. In the light of law laid down by Hon'bl e Supreme Court, the evidence available on record has been examined with able assistance of learned counse l for the parties which does not fulfill the pre-requisites of law as the petitioner failed to discharge the onus put on her qua correctness, validity and legality of purported gift. It is well settled law that validity of a gift is always proved by the donee that it was without duress and executed by donor in all senses and it was accepted by the donee and possession was also delivered to him in its wake and incase of missing of anyone of the ingredient the claim of the donee would be rejected outrightly . Learned counsel for the petitioners failed to refer any material piece of evidence to demonstrate that they have proved on record the essential three ingredients for completion of valid gilt. Since deficiency in the evidence to prove the valid gift is floating on the surface of record and the learned counsel for the petitioners also failed to point out any illegality and irregularity committed by the teamed Courts below while dismissing suit and appeal of the petitioners therefore, no interference in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 1 15 C.P .C., is warranted.
5. In view of the above, I do not find any illegality and irregularity in the judgments of both the learned Courts below , which are not only in consonance with the available evidence on record but also the settled principles of law on the subject. Thus, this revision petition having no merit stands dismissed. No order as to costs.
"Indeed, if a document in the form of memorandum of gift has been executed between the parties (donor and done) as an acknowledgement of past transaction of oral gift, its non-registration Will not have much bearing as regards its authenticity or validity , but the other important thing is the proof of fulfillment of three conditions of a valid gift "of fer", "acceptance" and "delivery of possession"