M.S.H.QURAISHI, J.-- It is not necessary for the disposal of this petition to describe in detail the facts of the case, for the main question is that of locus standi of the petitioner to seek the transfer of the property, i.e., Ishar Dass Building, McLeod Road, Lahore. This property alongwith three other properties had been first declared to be non-evacuee but after the migration of the owners had been treated as evacuee property. Ishar Dass Building was declared to be a "Big Mansion". The petitioner is claiming under his late father Ghulam Ahmad who had first pursued the litigation concerning the property as attorney of the evacuee owners and later as a legatee of G.S. Kapur, one of the owners. G.S. Kapur who had died in India in 1955 is said to have executed a will in favour of Ghulam Ahmad on 17-9-1950 in respect of this and the three other properties. Ghulam Ahmad had filed a civil suit on 7-11-1968, on the strength of the will, which, according to him, had come to his knowledge on 6-11-1968. The suit was dismissed for non-prosecution on 12-9-1972. Earlier in 1975, the petitioner and others had applied for transfer of the property under Scheme NO.VIII and the Chief Settlement Commissioner had, on 8-12-1975, directed the Deputy Settlement Commissioner to dispose of the property under the relevant Scheme but the Deputy Settlement Commissioner finding himself "in fix" declined to determine the status of the property, vide his order dated 25-3- 1976 which became the subject-matter of challenge in a number of writ petiti6ns including Writ Petition No.903-R of 1976 filed by respondent No. l against the petitioner and his mother respondent No. 2.
2. In Revision No. 832 of 1970 arising out of the petitioner's suit, a learned Judge of the Lahore High Court had observed, "it (will) clearly appears to be a forged document". Commenting on the will, the learned Judge of the High Court in the impugned judgment observed: "The predecessor-in-interest of the respondents (present petitioner) from 1950 to 1968 contended that he was the attorney of the heirs of G.S.Kapur and when all efforts to retain the property failed, came forward to say that their predecessor i.e. G.S.Kapur had in fact left the property to him by 'will'.
The plea that he did not come to know of the will all through these years cannot be accepted ipsi dixit. He should have established all the facts in proper forum in appropriate proceedings. Plain assertion, in the background of facts and litigation, based on what appeared to be perjury can hardly be given currency. Therefore, the respondents had no right to contest the petition "
We are unable to find fault with the view taken by the High Court. The locus standi of Ghulam Ahmad and for that matter of his son, the present petitioner, not having been established, the petitioner could not claim the transfer of the property in his favour. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.