IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J. -- We have gone through the impugned judgment dated 30.4.2001 of the Lahore High Court carefully. The relevant paragraph of the said judgment for the sake of convenience is reproduced below:- "7. The concurrent findings of the Courts below are supported by the evidence on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show any misreading or mis-application of law by the Courts below. Learned Additional District Judge correctly appraised the evidence in holding that Sharif deceased had not gifted the suit property to the petitioner particularly on account of his death just after 17 days of the alleged gift mutation. The impugned judgment does not suffer from any legal infirmity or material irregularity, warranting interference. This petition has no merit and same is dismissed with no order as to costs."
2. A perusal of the record indicates that all the Courts including the learned High Court have concurrently held that the essential ingredients of gift have not been proved inasmuch as perusal of mutation entry dated 20.12.1980 also does not indicate that an offer was made by the doner and the donee accepted the same in presence of revenue official who attested the mutation entry. Similarly, there is no entry as to whether the property in dispute was handed over to the donee by the doner. In this view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that concurrent finding of fact admits no interference by this Court within the contemplation of Article 185(3) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The above C.M.A. And the petition for leave to appeal being without any merit are dismissed.