The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that an inheritance mutation by itself does not create title to immovable property, while long-standing entries in revenue records carry a presumption of truth unless successfully rebutted.
Supreme Court Decision in Johan Bano Case
On 15 April 2024, the Supreme Court of Pakistan decided the case of Mst. Johan Bano and others versus Mehraban Shah and others. The bench comprised Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa, Justice Irfan Saadat Khan and Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan.
The dispute concerned land situated in Mouza Dargai, Tehsil and District Charsadda. The parties' predecessors had entered into an oral exchange of land in 1945, which was subsequently reflected in revenue records and confirmed through an exchange deed executed in 1980.
- The judgment was decided on 15 April 2024.
- The case was Mst. Johan Bano and others v. Mehraban Shah & others.
- The case is reported as 2024 SCMR 1096.
- The dispute concerned ownership and exchange of agricultural land.
- The property was situated in Mouza Dargai, District Charsadda.
Inheritance Mutation Does Not By Itself Create Title
The Supreme Court examined an inheritance mutation that had been entered in favour of the petitioners after the death of their predecessor. The Court considered whether the mutation itself established ownership of the disputed land.
The Court reiterated that a mutation entry by itself does not create title. In this case, the respondents relied on long-standing entries in jamabandis and khasra girdawaris showing their cultivating possession pursuant to the earlier land exchange.
- An inheritance mutation by itself does not create title to property.
- Mutation entries carry a rebuttable presumption rather than independently establishing ownership.
- Revenue records can be relevant evidence in property disputes.
- The Court examined jamabandis and khasra girdawaris maintained over several years.
- The parties' earlier exchange of land was supported by documentary and oral evidence.
Presumption Attached to Long-Standing Revenue Records
The Supreme Court considered the effect of Section 52 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967, which attaches a presumption of truth to entries in periodical records of rights until the contrary is proved.
The Court found that the long-standing revenue entries, together with the evidence regarding the 1945 exchange and the 1980 exchange deed, supported the respondents' position. The petitioners failed to rebut the presumption attached to the relevant revenue records. The Supreme Court therefore refused leave to appeal and dismissed the petition.
- Section 52 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967 was considered.
- Long-standing entries in periodical revenue records carry a presumption of truth.
- The presumption can be rebutted by sufficient contrary evidence.
- The Court considered both documentary and oral evidence.
- The Supreme Court refused leave to appeal and dismissed the petition.
This article is general information about how things work in Pakistan, not legal advice. Procedure varies by province, forum and the facts of your matter.
Need this handled properly?
Find a verified lawyer who works on matters like this every week.
Find attorneys