1. M. R. KHAN, J.-The petitioners brought a suit for possessions in respect of 33 kanals and 14-5/8 marlas of land out of 38 kanals and 11 marlas situated in village Bam Khel, Tehsil Swabi. The lands originally belonged to Sardar. Before the introduction of Shariat Law in December 1935, Sardar died leaving behind two sons Jamaldar and Sarkar and one daughter Mst. Zarjan (petitioner No. 2).
2. Jamaldar died leaving behind his widow Mst. Wala Jan and one daughter Mst. Ilhamia (petitioner No. 1). Sarkar died leaving behind his widow Mst. Zarshan who is the respondent No. 21 herein.
3. Having regard to the successive devolutions, the trial Court found that Mst. Ilhamia and Mst. Zarjan, the plaintiffs of the suit were entitled to possession of 10 kanals and 13 marlas of land out of the suit land. The plaintiffs preferred an appeal against the trial Court's decree. The Firsz Appellate Court allowed their appeal in part and granted a decree for possession in respect of 12 kanals and 1 marla of land out of the suit land. Not being content with the appellate decree, the plaintiffs preferred a Regular Second Appeal in the High Court of West Pakistan, Peshawar Bench. The Second Appeal was, however, dismissed by a learned Judge of that Bench.
4. The petitioners now seek special leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court. The petitioners have challenged the legality of mutation No. 3401 which was attested on the 22nd February 1938. If this mutation goes out, the quantum of land in the share of the petitioners will be increased. Jamaldar, one of the two sons of the original owner Sarkar sold half of the suit land to one Abdur Rahim. This sale was mutated as per muta--tion No. 3401. Jamaldar having died before the attestation of mutation, his widow Mst. Wala Jan attested the mutation on behalf of her husband on the 22nd February, 1938. Mst. Walal Jan made a statement that the said mutation was entered by her husband Jamaldar in his lifetime and that he himself had received Rs. 809, out of the consideration and the balance of Rs. 549 was received by her. It was on the basis of this statement that the Revenue Officer, by his order, dated the 22nd February 1938, attested the sale of half of the suit land in favour of Abdur Rahim. Both the trial Court and the appellate Court accepted the correctness of the mutation No. 3401, and the learned Judge of the High Court also accepted it to be correct on the basis of the material stated hereinbefore. The petitioners therefore can no more challenge the correctness of mutation No.3401.
5. No other point was pressed on behalf of the petitioners. The petition is dismissed.