' GHULAM MUJADDID MIRZA, J.--Muhammad Hayat son of Mirza Khan, Sipra by caste, resident of Maroolianwala, Tehsil Bhalwal, District Sargodha filed suit for possession through pre-emption of 9 Kanals of land in Khewat No,196, Klidiauni No,1124, Killa No,23 of Square No,269, as described in Jamabandi for the year 1974-75 of the said village.
2. Muhammad Hayat claimed his superior right on the ground of his being collateral of the vendor and co-sharer in the Khata of the suit land.
3. Farman Ali etc. Contested the suit and raised many legal as well as factual objections.
4. The trial Court framed the following issues:-- {{URDU TEXT}} ' The trial Court found all the issues, except issue No,5 in favour of the plaintiff Issue No,5 was decided against him and on the basis of that the suit was dismissed.
5. Muhammad Hayat went in appeal, which was accepted by the Additional District Judge, Sargodha, who decreed the suit by his judgment dated 15-11-1983.
6. Farman All and others have now come in revision against the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge.
7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the appellate Court erred in law in upsetting the finding of the trial Court regarding issue No,5. In support of this contention, learned counsel relied on Madan Gopal and 4 others v. Maran Bepari and 3 others PLD 1969 SC 617.
8. I have considered this argument and have also gone through the above-mentioned judgment. I am unable to agree with the learned counsel. The appellate Court after taking into consideration the relevant evidence came to the conclusion that the finding of trial Court on issue A. No,5 was not correct. It was open to the appellate Court to re-examine the entire evidence and while doing so it could take judicial notice o all relevant evidence.
The conclusion arrived as such is a finding of fact which is not open to any exception in revision in the High Court.
9. The case cited by the learned counsel is not applicable to the facts of the present case.
10. For the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in the civil revision. The same is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.