1. ' The facts and . Circumstances in which this revision application has been filed are that the applicant filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction agars the respondent seeking to declare the order. Dated 24-10-1973 passed by respondent No,2 as illegal, void ab initio and inoperative against the rights of the plaintiff of property No,1 A. 536-A situated as Shah Bazar, Khairpur. This suit was dismissed on merits by the Senior Civil Judge IInd, Khairpur by judgmnt dated 30-9-1989 and an appeal against the judgment and decree was filed by the applicant in the District Court, Khairpur being Civil Appeal No,82 of 1989, which too has been dismissed by judgment dated 13-2-1991. It is in fact against these two concurrent findings that the present revision application has been filed though in the memo of revision application, the applicant seeks the setting aside of the order of First Appellate Court dated 13-2-1991.
2. ' It may be relevant to mention here that the First Appellate Court while deciding the appeal of the applicant had set aside the finding of the trial Court on issue No,5 and in the result also set aside the findings on issue Nos.1 and 3 and the appeal was dismissed.
3. ' The moot point in this revision is "ether the order of the Additional Settlement and Rehabilitation Commissioner, Khairpur Division, at Sukkur dated 24-7-1973 a photocopy whereof was filed by the applicant but not allowed to be produced in evidence and exhibited, could be considered by the trial Court or by the First Appellate Court. The observation of the learned trial Judge in respect of this document was that since the burden was on the applicant to prove the said order being illegal, he ought to have produced either the original or its certified copy in evidence. The findings of the trial Court in respect of the said order formed the basis of issue No,5, which was framed as under:- "Whether order of defendant No,2 cancelling allotment of plot bearing No,I. A. 536-A measuring 42 square yards of Hasmat ' All and subsequent transfer to the plaintiff is illegal, void and inoperative against the plaintiff?"
4. ' After a lengthy discussion on thais issue, the trial Court gave finding that this issue was not proved by the applicant/plaintiff. Much stress has been laid on the non-production of this order in original or its certified copy and not having been exhibited through evidence. This First Appellate Court on the said issue reversed the findings of the trial Court but has not decided as to what would be the effect of setting aside the finding of such issue. It has not been discussed by the First Appellate Court whether the said order of defendant No,2 was a void and illegal order or it was a proper and lawful order. Merely setting aside the findings on the said issue would lead the parties nowhere.
5. Likewise, the reasons for setting aside the findings on issue Nos.1 and 3 are not given and no evidence in that respect has been discussed. Valuable rights of the parties in respect of the suit property were involved and the decision given by the trial Court on merits should properly have been subjected to judicial scrutiny by the First Appellate Court and the evidence on each issue led before the Court should have been discussed before deciding the appeal of the applicant. The rule laid down in 1987 CLC 2281 should be kept into consideration by the appellate Court. Since the judgment of the First A Appellate Court is not in keeping with the rule laid down in the above judgment, the same cannot be sustained. It may also be mentioned that a document not properly produced in evidence but if available on record could be looked into. Reference in that behalf may be made to PLD 1975 Lahore 1170 and 1175.
6. ' In view of the' above circumstances the judgment and decree dated 13-2-1991 of the First Appellate Court in Civil Appeal No,82 of 1989 are set aside and the case is remanded to the First 4ppellate Court who shall proceed to decide the appeal in accordance with the provisions of Order 41, Rule 31, C.P.C. And also in view of the judgment of the Lahore High Court referred to above. The First Appellate Court shall give full opportunity to the parties of being heard and to decide the appeal expeditiously as the litigation between the parties in respect of disputed plot is pending since the year 1986. In the circumstances there shall be no order as to costs.