' Mian Muhammad Younis Shah, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Muhammad Latif Khan, Advocate, learned counsel for the respondent present and heard. Record of the case perused carefully.
2. It was held by his Lordship Mr. Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan of this Court in case titled Shah Hussain etc. v. Khani Zaman (PLD 1996 Peshawar 73) that performance of necessary Talbs had to be specifically mentioned in the body of the plaint.
3. However, when the said verdict was challenged before the Supreme Court in an appeal (Amir Jan and others v. Haji Ghulam Muhammad) PLD 1997 Supreme Court 883, it was held by their Lordship Mr. Justice Fazal Ilahi Khan and his Lordship Mr. Justice Nasir Aslam Zahid, that it was not at all necessary to mention the time, place and the date regarding the "Talb-i-Muwathibat" in the body of the plaint and that it would be enough if it was mentioned in the plaint that "Talb", as required under the law, was in fact made. It was further held by the Supreme Court that the factum of making "Talb-i-Muwathibat" could be established by the plaintiff by producing evidence, oral or documentary, at the time of the trial.
4. In a recent case, Khani Zaman v. Shah Hussain and others, another Division Bench of the Supreme Court, comprising of His Lordship Mr. Justice Munwar Ahmad Mirza and his Lordship Mr. Justice Sheikh Ijaz Nisar, vide its order, dated 9-1-1998 (PLD 1998 Supreme Court 121) has held that it was necessary to mention the details in the plaint regarding time, place and the date on which "Talb-i-Muwathibat" was actually made as the same was necessary for calculating the period of limitation for "Talb-i-Ishhad".
5. It has been admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner and rightly so that in this case the petitioner has failed to mention the place, date, time and the manner in which he had made "Talb- i-Muwathibat" in the plaint. Similarly he has failed to mention the same in his statement when he was examined as his own witness in the Trial Court.
6. Accordingly by following the dictum laid down by the latest judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, I have no option but to hold that no illegality or material irregularity has been committed by the lower forums in dismissing the petitioner's suit/appeal. This revision petition is, therefore, without any substance is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.