Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Fazal Azeem vs. Noor Muhammad Civil Suit For Declaration Challenging Mutation
Fazal Azeem vs. Noor Muhammad Civil Suit For Declaration Challenging Mutation
VERSUS
1. Noor Muhammad
2. Muhammad Younas
3. Nisar Muhammad Sons of
4. Mst. Shaman Baigum
5. Mst. Anjuman Baigum
6. Mst. Iqbal Baigum
7. Mst. Hamida Baigum Daughters of Yaqoob Khan R’s/o Toru Tehsil and
District Mardan
8. Patwari Halqa Moza Shahbaz Garhi Tehsil and District Mardan
9. Girdawar Circle Moza Shahbaz Garhi Tehsil and District Mardan
10. Tehsildar Mardan
Defendants
=======================
Value of the suit for the purpose of court fee Rs. 600/-
Value of the suit for the purpose of jurisdiction Rs. 600/-
=======================
Respectfully sheweth,
2. That the predecessor of the plaintiffs namely Samandar Khan gifted his entire
shares in the suit Khewats No-739 and 769 of 1941/42 (which total land came
to 24.83 Kanals) in favour of Molvi Muhammad Idrees S/o Muhamad Ayub
Khan vide mutation No-2513 and later on Molvi Muhammad Idrees
exchanged this land with the predecessor of the defendants namely
Muhammad Yaqoob vide mutations No-2672 and 2851 or others which are
proved through evidence (because of the entries of column of transaction in
mutations). Copies are annexed herewith.
3. That the gift had taken place before the marriage of Molvi Samandar Khan,
the predecessor of the present plaintiffs and after his marriage, all the three
noted above persons once again settled the matter in the since that half the
share of the gifted property measuring 12 Kanals 9 Marlas was given back to
Molvi Samandar Khan. As by that time the exchange mutations had already
been attested therefore the property couldn’t be reverted back directly from
Molvi Muhammad Idrees in favour of Molvi Samandar Khan.
4. That In fact Yaqoob Khan (the predecessor in interest of the defendants No-1
to 7) had directly entered two mutations No-3196 and 3197 of 1952 in favour
of Molvi Samandar Khan to the extent of half of the gifted property (i.e. land
measuring 4 Kanals and 14 Marlas in Khewat No-739 and land measuring 7
Kanals and 14 Marlas in Khewat No-769 of the year 1941/42, total measuring
12 Kanals and 9 Marlas). That the predecessors had also executed and acted
upon private settlements in respect of the entire property. Inadvdertnatly
mutation No-3197 has been shown as rejected but infact valid gifts had been
made by Yqqoob Khan in favour of Molvi Samandar of the land noted above
and then mutations were entered. All the three requirements of gift had been
completed and possession delivered to the predecessor of the plaintiffs. Since
then the plaintiffs are in possessions of their shares. These mutations also find
reflection in the revenue record. As mutation No-3197 has wrongly been
shown as rejected, therefore the plaintiffs are entitled to its acceptance.
Attested copies of the mutations and revenue record of Perth Patwar and Perth
Sarkar are annexed herewith.
8. That value of the suit for the purpose of court fee and jurisdiction are
given at the heading and this Honourable court has got jurisdiction to
entertain the suit in hand.
It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that the suit of the plaintiffs may
kindly be decreed as prayed for with costs.
Date: 15/12/2012
==========
Fazal Azeem etc
Plaintiffs
Through,
Naveed-ur-Rahman
Advocate, Mardan
AFFIDAVIT
I Naveed-ur-Rahman, counsel for the plaintiffs do hereby solemnly affirm that all the
contents of this plaint are true and correct to the best of my information given to me
by my clients and to the best of the knowledge and belief of my clients.
Naveed-ur-Rahman
Deponent
IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE MARDAN
VERSUS
Noor Muhammad
===========
Civil Suit
============
Subject: - Application for the grant of temporary injunction till disposal of the suit
in hand for restraining defendants from from all acts and deeds to the prejudice of
the plaintiffs.
=============
Respectfully sheweth,
1. That the suit mentioned-above has been filed before this Honorable
Court.
2. That the suit in hand has been filed on very strong grounds and the
Petitioners hope its success.
3. That Respondents are bent upon alienation of the suit property on the
basis of wrong entries in the revenue record and if they were not
restrained during the pendency of the suit in hand, the Petitioners would
suffer irreparable loss.
4. That balance of convenience also lies in favor of the Petitioners.
It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that by accepting the application in
hand Respondents may kindly be restrained from interference in the suit
property till the disposal of the suit in hand.
Date: 15/12/2012
==========
Fazal Azeem etc
Plaintiffs
Through,
Naveed-ur-Rahman
Advocate, Mardan
AFFIDAVIT
I Naveed-ur-Rahman, counsel for the plaintiffs do hereby solemnly affirm that all the
contents of this plaint are true and correct to the best of my information given to me
by my clients and to the best of the knowledge and belief of my clients.
Naveed-ur-Rahman
Deponent