ABDUL OADEER CHAUDHRY, J: --Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 9-1-1989 whereby the revision petition of the respondents was allowed.
2. The facts, in brief, are that some land in the revenue estate of Wardag, Tehsil Attock belonged to Sargand Khan. In 1962, he died issueless. Consequently, land owned by him was mutated in the name of Mst.Khanum Ji, his widow, and, his brother Jabbar Khan, in the ratio of 1/4th and 3/4th respectively. Waris Khan was excluded from the inheritance being held as consanguine brother of deceased Sargand Khan. Waris Khan appealed to Collector Campbellpur and the case was remanded on 30-5-1963 for a decision afresh. On 14-5-1966 the Revenue Officer finding that Waris Khan was consanguine brother of Sargand Khan, gave his land to his widow and full brother Jabbar Khan. Meanwhile, Waris Khan having died in 1965, his son Farid Khan and daughter Mst.
Hassan Jan brought a suit for their 3/8th share in the property of Sargand Khan claiming that Waris Khan their father was full brother of the deceased and not consanguine as held by the Revenue Authorities. Mst. Khanum Ji defendant No.2 in the suit was proceeded against ex parte. Only Jabbar Khan defendant No.1 resisted the suit. He denied that Waris Khan was his full brother and instead stated that Hassan Khan, his father had two wives, namely, Mst.Haleeman and Mst.Khanum Noor.
From the latter's marriage with Hassan Khan, two sons, namely, Sargand Khan and Jabbar Khan were born and from Mst.Haleeman, Waris Khan, the only son was born, therefore, Waris Khan being a consanguine brother, was not entitled to share with Jabbar Khan in the property left by Sargand Khan.
3. The trial Court dismissed the suit. In appeal, the learned District Judge decreed the plaintiffs' suit.
The decree of the District Judge was challenged in second appeal which was accepted and the judgment and decree of the District Judge dated 25-11-1968 was set aside and the order of the trial Court was restored.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that he has not filed the two documents Ex.D-2 and Ex.D-3. These documents have been referred in the judgments of the Courts below. However, the learned counsel stated that he will not refer to these documents and even otherwise these documents are not relevant for the disposal of the present case.
5. The District Judge has referred to the mutation Ex.D-2 and stated that according to these documents, the widow of Sargand had been asserting throughout that Jabbar and Waris were real brothers and Farid Khan had already been pursuing his case. There is also a reference in the mutation that one Walidad supported the assertion of Farid Khan to the effect that Waris and Sargand were real brothers.
6. The Civil Judge has also interpreted these two documents Ex.D-2 and Ex.D-3 and relied upon these documents in favour of the defendants. The dispute between the parties was that Sargand Khan and Jabbar were real brothers. The learned High Court has observed as follows:- "I am led to the only conclusion that plaintiffs had failed to discharge the burden of issue which lay upon them to establish and prove that Waris Khan their predecessor-in-interest was full brother of Sargand Khan deceased so as to share equally with Jabbar Khan in the property of the deceased."
7. Ex.D-2 and Ex.D-3 are the important documents and the learned counsel himself referred to these documents. The Courts below have referred to these documents. As the important documents have been withheld, therefore, the petition was not properly documented and it had to be dismissed on this ground alone. Reliance may be placed on Noor Khan v. Member, Board of Revenue 1984 SCMR 681 and Ch. Abdul Ghani v. Additional Commissioner (Revenue) 1988 SCMR390.
8. There is no force in this petition. Leave to appeal is refused-and the petition is dismissed.