' RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.---This petition is directed against Lahore High Court, Rawlapindi Bench judgment, dated 7-6-2001 in Civil Revision No,144-D of 1990 dismissing petitioner's revision petition against concurrent findings of fact dismissing his suit for possession of a house against respondents Nos.6 to 8.
2. The suit was contested by respondents Nos.6 to 8 on the premises that petitioner had gifted away the property in suit to his wife Mst. Shamim Akhtar in lieu of her dower at the time of his marriage. On assessm ent of evidence, trial Court dismissed the suit on the finding that the petitioner had in fact gifted out the property in favour of the wife, which was upheld by the First Appellate Court on reappraisal of evidence. In civil revision, however, learned Judge in Chambers, on scrutiny of the evidence and re-evaluation thereof, came to the conclusion that the factum of gift by the petitioner in favour of Mst. Shamim Akhtar was not proved, inasmuch as, other legal heirs being co-sharers in the property had not consented to the act of gift; that possession of the property was not parted with and that in fact the petitioner's letter, dated 6-11-1982 (Exh.P.2) for letting out the property on rent had been acted upon by respondent No,7, who was none else but real brother of Mst. Shamim Akhtar. Having recorded this findings, however, learned Judge proceeded to dismiss the revision. An application for clarification for the inconsistency in the judgment did not bear any fruit hence this petition for leave to appeal.
3. With the assistance of the learned counsel for the petitioner, we have gone through the impugned judgment as well as the relevant record. It appears that, on the face of record, the impugned judgment suffers from gross confusion and ambiguity, inasmuch as, having held that the factum of gift was not proved, High Court in all fairness ought to have accepted the revision application and dismissed the suit but this course was not adopted.
4. In this view of the matter, Mr. Abdur Rashid Awan, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the contesting respondents frankly concedes to the setting aside of the impugned judgment and remand of the case to the High Court for a fresh decision strictly in accordance , with law, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the parties.
5. Concession of the learned counsel for the contesting respondents being fair, proper and reasonable, we have no hesitation in accepting the same. Accordingly, we convert this petition into appeal, set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court and remand the case to the High Court for a fresh, decision strictly in accordance with law at an early date.