1. ' MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALT, J.-Courts below have concurrently found that the gift made in favour of the petitioner by his uncle late Mir Ilahi Bux was not accompanied by delivery of possession. We have ourselves perused the record and come to the same conclusion. Indeed we are further of the view that no gift was at all made by Mir Ilahi Bux in favour of the petitioner. The letters written by Mir Ilahi Bux on which the petitioner relies are couched in flowery and metaphorical language. They, in fact, mean nothing except a pious wish. So did the petitioner understand these letters to mean as years after these letters were written, he wrote a letter inquiring whether Mir Ilahi Bux had changed his mind or he could undertake construction of a house on the plots which he had gifted to him orally?
2. ' Be that as it may, we find no proper ground to interfere with the concurrent finding of fact that the so-called gift was not accompanied by delivery of possession. It is significant that on the death of Ilahi Bux, his son Mir Hussain Bux, respondent No, 2, has sold the same plots to Races Muhammad Mushtaq, respondent No, 1, for a sum of Rs, 28,000. New property rights have thus come into being which cannot be displaced on the mere assertion of an oral gift, not accompanied by delivery of possession.
3. The petition for leave to appeal is dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.