' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.--This petition for leave to appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 19th November 1998 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore whereby civil revision filed by petitioner has been dismissed.
2. Precisely stating the facts of the case are that respondent Muhammad Rafiq Ashraf, his sister Sharifan and mother Zainab Bibi (plaintiffs) filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against Mst. Fatima (defendant). As per the plaintiff's version one Allah Din was the owner of suit- land, details whereof were mentioned in the plaint. He was the father of Muhammad Rafiq Ashraf and Mst. Sharifan plaintiffs and husband of Mst. Zainab Bibi. Said Allah Din died about 10 years prior to the institution of the instant suit and one Ghulam Muhammad maternal uncle of Mst. Fatima moved an application before the Revenue Authorities for the sanction of inheritance mutation of Allah Din deceased in favour of the plaintiffs alongwith Mst. Fatima petitioner, alleging that she was the daughter of said Allah Din and got sanctioned Mutation of inheritance No,482, whereby Mst.
Fatima petitioner was given due share from the suit property of said Allah Din admitting her as his daughter although she had no valid and legitimate right/claim of her relationship with the deceased. Respondent Muhammad Rafiq Ashraf and others challenged the legality and propriety of the said mutation of inheritance by filing the aforesaid declaratory suit. Petitioner contested the suit by way of filing written statement wherein she categorically denied the plaintiff's assertion and loudly claimed that she was the real daughter of said Allah Din hence she was entitled to inherit the suit property as being co-sharer and alleged that impugned mutation of inheritance was sanctioned in her favour in accordance with law and"Shaira". Trial Court framed issued arising out of the pleadings of the parties. Both the parties led evidence in support of their respective pleas.
Learned trial Judge, after hearing both the sides and having gone through the evidence, decreed the suit vide judgment dated 26th May 1981 holding that marriage between Mst. Rehmatay mother of Mst. Fatima with Allah Din stands not established, therefore, her claim is false and imaginary.
Feeling aggrieved from the judgment of the trial Court, petitioner, Mst. Fatima appealed before Additional District Judge, Kasur, who vide judgment dated 13th February 1985 dismissed the same.
Being aggrieved from the judgment of the trial and Appellate Court, petitioner approached the learned High Court by way of filing civil revision, which too was dismissed by means of impugned judgment. As such instant petition has been filed.
3. Learned counsel stated that learned High Court as well as trial and Appellate Courts have not considered the effect of birth certificate of Mst. Fatima which was produced by her attorney Ghulam Muhammad.
4. After having examined the contention of learned counsel, we are of the opinion that statement so made by him is not correct because birth certificate was not produced by the attorney of petitioner Mst. Fatima nor she herself entered into witness-box to support its contents. Upon this, learned counsel stated that this document was tendered by the counsel for petitioner. Suffice it to observe that because document was not formally brought on record, therefore, Courts were not obliged to take the same into consideration. However, learned Civil Judge had considered the effect of the certificate and concluded that even if it is presumed to be correct, it would not advance the case of petitioner, because as per certificate Mst. Fatima has been shown as daughter of Dino. Even otherwise, there are concurrent findings of facts of all the Court below including the learned High Court to which no exception can be taken.
' Thus, for the foregoing reasons, we see no force in this petition as such the same is dismissed and leave declined.