' FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.---The petitioners seek leave to appeal against the judgment, dated 10-5-1999 passed by the Lahore High Court in Civil Revision No,1240 of 1993.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that Mst. Amiran Bibi deceased, (the predecessor-in- interest of respondents Nos.1 to 12) and Mst. Sheedan Mai, the respondent No,13, filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the petitioners and respondent No,14 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Bhakkar. It was averred in the plaint that they being daughters of Hakim Khan .Deceased were his legal heirs alongwith the petitioners and their mother, the respondent. The deceased Hakim Khan was owner of land measuring 504 Kanals. The petitioners fraudulently and illegally got two Mutations Nos.658 and 662 of gift of the land measuring 388 Kanals and 4 Marlas sanctioned on 7-8-1989 and 30-8-1989 in their favour purportedly made by the deceased Hakim Khan. It was pleaded that the plaintiffs were entitled to be declared owners of 67 Kanals and 8 Marlas out of the said land of 388 Kanals, and 4 Marlas being 1/5th of the 7/8th share as legal heirs of Hakim Khan deceased. The civil suit of the plaintiffs Mst. Amiran Mai deceased. And Mst. Sheedan Mai was decreed in their favour, on 8-3-1993, by die Civil Judge II Class, Bhakkar. The appeal and civil revision filed by the petitioners and respondent No,14 were dismissed by the District Judge, Bhakkar and the Lahore High Court, Lahore on 29-5-1993 and 10-5-1999 respectively. Hence this petition for leave to appeal.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners argued that all the Courts acted illegally in giving preference to the entries of Khasra Girdawri to which no presumption of correctness was attached.
The Courts misread the evidence on record that there was no delivery of possession of the suit property under the oral gift. It was further contended that the delivery of possession was not essential in the case of a gift of the land by the father in favour of his sons the petitioners, when all of them were living together. There was also misreading of statement of the Assistant Collector in regard to the appearance of Hakim Khan at the time of sanctioning the mutations in the presence of other witnesses. The entries of mutations were sufficient to prove the offer and acceptance of gift of the property. It was lastly contended that Issue No,3 regarding the Mutations Nos.658 and 662 as being fictitious, collusive and ineffective qua the rights of the said plaintiffs had not been proved by any reliable evidence. Similarly, the plaintiffs had failed to discharge the onus of proof, on Issue No,4 that they were the legal heirs of deceased Hakim Khan and were entitled to their share of inheritance.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners at some length. All the Courts recorded concurrent findings of fact that the plaintiffs had succeeded in proving Issue No,3 that the gift by Hakim Khan deceased was inchoate and mutations of gift had been wrongly sanctioned in favour of the petitioners. Rab Nawaz D.W.1 admitted that at the relevant time Hakim Khan deceased was of the age of 90 years. Muhammad Ishaq, Naib Tehsildar/Assistant Collector who sanctioned the mutations appeared as P.W.2 and stated that he did not know Hakim Khan deceased personally.
Ghulam Abbas D.W. Was not a witness to the mutations (Exhs.Dl and D2). The petitioner No,1 Muhammad Khan appeared as D.W.S. He did not state that there was any special reason or service for which Hakim Khan deceased gifted away the property in favour of the petitioners. Deceased Hakim Khan was in the complete control, custody and influence of the petitioners. The Courts were justified in taking the view that the said deceased could not be said to A have exercised his .Will freely. The learned counsel for the petitioners failed to point out any misreading or non-reading of material evidence on record. The Lahore High Court also took the correct view that the petitioners had failed to establish all the three ingredients of a valid gift i.e, declaration, acceptance and delivery of possession of the property. The Exh.D3 tendered in evidence by the petitioners showed that Hakim Khan had died at a fairly advanced age. From the facts and circumstances of the case, it seems that the mutations of gift were meant to deprive the plaintiffs of their Islamic right of inheritance. Such a contrivance on the part of the petitioners had to be discouraged by the Courts whereby their sisters were deprived of the rights of inheritance of property. Reference may usefully be made to the case of Muzher Ali v. Mst. Ghulam Sarwar Naqvi (PLD 1990 SC 1). The impugned judgment does not suffer from any legal or factual infirmity so as to call for any indulgence by this Court.
5. We do not find any merit in this petition which is accordingly dismissed.