1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought by a defendant, against the dismissal by the High Court, of her Civil Revision. It has arisen out of a dispute over a property which admittedly belonged to the mother of the parties herein--they are sisters inter se.
2. ' The petitioner's claim is that the suit property had been sold to her by the mother and thus had excluded to that extent, the respondent. It was challenged by the mother, now deceased, through a civil suit. The petitioner, as stated by the learned counsel, filed a written statement but she subsequently absented. The trial Court examined the case on merits without framing the issues thereon and dismissed the suit. After the filing of the appeal the plaintiff (mother of the parties) died. The respondent was impleaded as an heir. The appeal was allowed by the District Court on merits and the suit was decreed against the petitioner. Her civil revision having been dismissed she has now sought leave to appeal.
3. ' Learned counsel stated that although points regarding valuation and court-fee as also the technical objection in respect of form of the suit, were raised but the same are not pressed because of the recent developments in the precedent law regarding those technicalities. He however vehemently contended that the trial Court fell into error when it examined the merits of the suit without framing the issues thereon, notwithstanding the fact that the petitioner had submitted her written statement. The argument to say the least is extraordinary. The petitioner having herself absented, could not raise complaint of the type as afore noticed. Be that as it may she was not at all prejudiced. Suit filed against her was also dismissed.
4. ' There is no complaint that the appeal and civil revision filed by the petitioner were not properly heard and disposed of. In our view the petitioner has not at all been prejudiced even in these proceedings.
5. ' After hearing the learned counsel we feel satisfied that the decision of the appeal and the revisional Court against the petitioner is unexceptionable. Leave to appeal, accordingly, is refused.