Police officers walk past the Supreme Court of Pakistan building in Islamabad, Pakistan April 6, 2022. REUTERS
ISLAMABAD:
Pakistan’s Supreme Court has set aside an order transferring land based on an alleged oral agreement dating back to 1992, ruling that mere possession or prolonged occupation does not establish ownership. The court allowed the appeal filed by Ghulam Ali.
Judge Shahid Bilal Hassan delivered the written judgment stating that a strict standard of proof applies in cases involving oral agreements. The decision held that the alleged 1992 oral agreement had not been proven in accordance with the requirements of the Act.
The Supreme Court quashed the judgments of the Lahore High Court, the Additional District Judge and the Trial Court. The court clarified that in order to establish an oral agreement, full details must be given regarding date, time, place, terms and witnesses. It further held that evidence deviating from the written pleadings cannot be admissible.
According to the written judgment, the plaintiffs argued that a settlement had been reached in 1992 following the acquittal of a defendant in a homicide case involving their father. It was claimed that a jirga decided that Ghulam Ali would transfer 32 kanals of land to the plaintiffs and that the possession of the land was transferred to them after the settlement.
The plaintiffs further alleged that in 2016 Ghulam Ali refused to have the mutation formally registered.
The background of the case reveals that the High Court had initially rejected the plaintiffs’ claim. However, on appeal, the action for specific performance was dismissed. The Additional District Judge and subsequently the Lahore High Court upheld the decision of the lower court.
The Supreme Court emphasized in its ruling that a claim based on an oral agreement must be established through solid and unassailable evidence; otherwise such claims cannot be sustained by law.
