' M. S. H. QURAISHI, J.-This petition for leave to appeal arises out of a suit brought by Noor Muhammad Khan (respondent No. 1) in which he had sought a declaration that he was the exclusive owner in possession of the entire land measuring 71 Kanals 12 Marlas comprised in Khata No, 20/141 to 148, situate in Village Behram Khan Killi, Tehsil Mardan, and that transfer of the same by registered gift deeds executed by respondents 2, 4 and 5 in favour of Muhammad Masood Khan petitioner, was ineffective and inoperative against his rights. He had also sought a permanent injunction for restraining the defendants from interfering with his possession. In the alternative, he had sought a decree for possession by pre-emption in respect of an area of 51 Kanals 10i Marlas out of the suit land. The plaintiff's case was that his father Behram Khan had purchased the suit land from Sohbat by Mutation No, 433 attested on 21-4-1892, that Behram Khan had taken delivery of possession of the land and that after him the plaintiff had, by a private partition with his brother Ikram UlIah, come to possess the suit land as its exclusive owner. According to him, the suit land had been leased out in favour of Abdul Khaliq (respondent No 32) on 14-8-1959 who was cultivating it through Amir Shah (respondent No, 31) and Muhammad Masood Khan (petitioner) but on account of non-payment of the lease money he had brought a suit for recovery of the lease money and ejectment of Abdul Khaliq, and it was in order to defeat that suit that the transaction had been got made fraudulently.
2. The suit having been contested, a number of issues were framed including Issue No, 7 which related to the plaintiff's claim to be the exclusive owner of the suit land. The trial Court on examination of the relevant documentary evidence found Issue No, 7 in favour of the plaintiff holding that .He was the exclusive owner or the suit land except Khasra No, 695/ 111-112 measuring 13 Kanals 4 Marlas which was the exclusive property of, his brother lkram Ullah. In view of this finding, the trial Court granted the declaratory decree in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the suit land except Khasra No, 695/111-112 respecting which the plaintiff's suit was dismissed. The judgment was upheld in appeal and revision.
3. The petition obviously questions the finding on Issue No, 7 which is one of fact, found concurrently in favour of Noor Muhammad Khan plaintiff (respondent No. 1 herein) after due examination of the material on record. The High Court has held that the fact of the sale made by Sohbat in favour of Behram Khan, father of the plaintiff, in 1892 had been given effect to in the revenue record from then onward ; that after Behram Khan, his successors had been recorded in possession and that the relevant record "throughout supported the claim of the plaintiff to the extent which has been decreed by the learned Courts below". No case is, therefore, made out for interference. The petition is accordingly dismissed and leave to appeal refused.