SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---Respondent No.1 owned occupancy rights in State land situate in Chak No.49/3-R of Tehsil Okara. By a registered sale-deed dated 15-1-1981 she sold these rights to the petitioner for a sum of Rs.20,000. On 3-2-1981 she filed a civil suit for a declaration inter aria to the effect that the sale-deed had been obtained from her fraudulently and that it was ineffective in so far her rights in the said land were concerned. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court but on appeal it was decreed by the Additional District Judge, Okara. The petitioner filed a revision petition in the High Court but that met with no success. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
2. The case of the petitioner was that respondent No.1 had not only executed the sale-deed but had appeared before the Sub-Registrar at the time of its registeration; further, before the sale was effected, she had appeared before the Collector for obtaining permission under section 19, Colonization of the Government Lands Act, for effecting the sale.
3: In support of this petition it is contended that the learned Single Judge in the High Court misread the record when he made the following observations: "The defendant also claimed that she had herself appeared in the proceedings before the Colony Assistant to pray for the grant of sanction under section 19 of the Colonization of the Government Lands (Punjab) Act to sell this land in his favour and further alleged that she had also made a statement to that effect before him. But in this suit he did not prove so and remained content with the production of a certified copy from that record without either summoning the original record of her statement or taking any step to have her thumb impression thereon compared to establish the identity of the maker of that statement."
It is pointed out that during the course of the trial the petitioner had summoned the original record from the office of the Collector and had also examined as one of his witnesses the local advocate who had identified respondent No.1 before the Collector.
4. After going through the evidence placed on record, there appears to be substance in the contention of the petitioner. Leave to appeal is granted. Security for costs Rs.5,000. The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present I record with permission to the parties to file additional documents, if any.