This judgment will also dispose of R.SA. No. 399 of 1974 as both the appeals have been filed against the same judgment passed by the lower appellate Court.
2. The dispute relates to land measuring 109 Kanals 4 Marlas comprising western part of Square No. 51 situated in Village 265/G.B, Tehsil T.T. Singh, District Faisalabad.
3. The facts of the case shortly stated are that the whole of land comprising Square No. 51 was originally allotted to Bahawal son of Muhammad deceased under Camel Breeding Scheme. He died in the year 1917. On his death the tenancy rights were transferred to his widow namely Mst.
Sultan Bibi as limited owner under custom till death or re-marriage. Bahawal also left Mst. Bhagan his daughter as one of his heir. The Camel Breeding-Scheme was abolished in the year 1923 as a consequence of which land comprising entire. Square No. 51 was resumed by the Government through Mutation No. 129 sanctioned on 5-6-1923 (Exh. P.2). Later on the said Camel Breeding Scheme was revived and Mutation No. 130 was sanctioned on 8-6-1923 (Exh. P.3) through which the land comprising Square No. 51 was divided into two parts. The eastern part of this square was allotted to Amir, Shamir and Dilmir the real brothers of Bahawal the original allottee predecessor- in-interest of the appellants who have been substituted as appellants through order passed today in C.M. No. 1/C of 1993. The western half of the said square measuring 109 Kanals 4 Marlas was allotted to Sultan Bibi as limited owner being widow of Bahawal till her death or re--marriage.
4. On the death of Sultan Bibi on 30-7-1970 the whole of the said land was mutated in favour of her daughter Mst. Bhaghan through Mutation No. 112 sanctioned on 5-10-1970, as sole heir of Bahawal holding that he being Shia as such Mst. Bhaghan had.inherited whole of the said land.
5. The appellants in this appeal challenged the legality of said mutation by filing suit on 4-10-1971 from which both the appeals have arisen. Their case was that allotment of land in favour of Mst.
Sultan Bibi was independent and fresh allotment with the condition that on her death or re- marriage her daughter Mst. Bhaghan would be given possession thereof till her marriage and after termination of latter's limited interest the land would revert to Amir, Shamir and Dilmir, therefore, it was alleged that in fact the allotment was made in favour of these three persons. The learned trial Court after considering the evidence produced by the parties accepted the plea raised on behalf of the appellants and decreed the suit. While decreeing the suit reliance was placed on an entry made in Column No: 15 on Mutation No. 130 sanctioned on 8-6-1923 (Exh. P.3) which was to the effect that on the death or re-marriage of Sultan Bibi and Mst. Bhaghan the land would revert to Amir, Shamir and Dilmir. The plea raised on behalf of Mst. Bhaghan the daughter of Bahawal that Bahawal deceased was Shia was not accepted as evidence produced by her was not believed. The suit was decreed through judgment and decree dated 18-7-1973.
6. Mst. Bhaghan feeling aggrieved filed appeal before the learned lower appellate Court which has been assailed in these two appeals. It was held that Mst. Sultan Bibi was limited owner and on her death the same reverted to Bahawal the original allottee and he being Sunni the inheritance had opened to all those persons who would have inherited under the Muhammadan Law as such 1/8th share which Mst. Sultan Bibi would have inherited was to go to Mst. Bhaghan her daughter as a whole and out of the remaining land 1/2 share would go to Mst. Bhaghan as daughter of Bahawal as such Bhaghan was held to have become owner of land measuring 109 Kanals 4 Marlas comprising western part of Square No. 51 which was 5/8th share and the remaining land would go to the appellants as reversioners of Bahawal. The findings recorded by the learned trial Court that Bahawal was not proved to be a Shia was upheld as such Mst. Bhaghan was not granted decree in respect of the entire land on that basis.
7. This appeal has been filed by heirs of Amir etc. whereas connected R.SA. No. 399 of 1974 has been filed by Mst. Bhaghan to claim the entire land as sole heir of Bahawal the original allottee on the ground that he was Shia.
8. ' The only question which arises for consideration is whether the allotment of western part of Square No. 51 made to Mst. Sultan Bibi was subject to condition that after termination of her life interest and the interest of her daughter Bhaghan the same was to revert to Amir, Shamir and Dilmir. The document produced to prove this fact is Mutation No. 130 sanctioned on 8-6-1923 (Exh.
P.3). In the order passed by Revenue Officer sanctioning the said mutation there is no mention of any such condition whereas it has only been stated that the land was allotted to Mst. Sultan Bibi till her death or re-marriage. marriage. Entries under column No. 15 of the said mutation to the effect that after termination of interest of Mst. Sultan Bibi and Mst. Bhaghan the land would revert to Amir, Shamir and Dilmir has no sanction behind it as the same has not been shown to have been signed by any competent officer. Learned lower appellate Court has rightly observed that the said entry appeared to have incorporated later on through interpolation and does not have any sanctity behind it. I have also gone through the said document and find that the said entry/note under Column No. 15 is unauthorised and does not carry any evidentiary value.
9. The argument of learned counsel for the appellants that the allotment made in favour of Mst.
Sultan Bibi after the revival of Camel Breeding Scheme was fresh allotment as such the land was not to revert to Bahawal the original allottee on termination of her life interest has no substance. At the time when Camel Breeding Scheme was annulled Mst. Sultan Bibi was holding life interest in the land after the death of Bahawal the original allottee which is evident from Mutation No. 129 sanctioned on 5-6-1923 (Exh. P.2). As it was she from whom the land was resumed, therefore, after the revival of Camel Breeding Scheme the intention was that Mst. Sultan Bibi should be restored to its original portion, therefore, western half Square No. 51 was allotted restored to her as limited owner. After her death the property was rightly held to have reverted to Bahawal the original allottee and was to be inherited by his heirs. Learned counsel for the appellants did not dispute the correctness of the findings that if inheritance is to open in relation to Bahawal being the last owner, Mst. Bhaghan has rightly been held to be the owner of land to the extent of 5/8th share.
10. As regards appeal filed by Mst. Bhaghan the same has also no force. Every Muslim was presumed to be Sunni by faith unless it was proved through cogent evidence that he was Shia.
Both the Courts below after elaborate and careful appraisal of evidence produced by Mst.
Bhaghan held that Bahawal was not proved to be Shia. This being concurrent finding of fact could be assailed only if the same had been shown to have suffered from a misapprehension or was condemnable on any of the grounds mentioned in section 100, C.P.C. I have examined the evidence produced by Mst. Bhaghan on this point and did not find that the same had been misread/misconstrued. The findings of the two Courts below concurrently recorded about Bahawal's faith do not suffer from any illegality calling for interference in second appeal.
11. In the result, both the appeals fail which are accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.