Fraud Allegations in Property Mutations must be adjudicated by Civil Courts, not Revenue Authorities --- Lahore High Court, Lahore 

Islamabad 18-02-2025: The Lahore High Court, in a recent judgment, dismissed [Writ Petition No. 8516/2022] against the District Collector, Faisalabad, challenging an order regarding disputed property mutations. Mr. Justice Anwaar Hussain ruled that allegations of fraud in property transactions must be adjudicated in plenary civil jurisdiction and not through summary revenue proceedings.  

The petitioner, approached the Assistant Collector, Faisalabad, seeking a review of mutation entries No. 1022 and 1023 (dated 22.11.2012) in favor of private Respondents. She alleged that these mutations were fraudulently sanctioned, as the original landowners had passed away before the transactions took place.  

The Assistant Collector rejected her application, stating that since fraud was alleged, the matter required detailed evidence, which falls under the jurisdiction of the Civil Court rather than the revenue authorities. This decision was challenged through a constitutional petition before the Lahore High Court.  

The Lahore High Court reaffirmed that fraud-related claims in revenue matters require adjudication through plenary jurisdiction (Civil Court). Section 172(2)(vi) of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967, which governs revenue officers’ authority, does not apply when fraud allegations arise.  

Reference Cases:  

1. Sardar Muhammad Vs. Imran Bakhsh (2021 SCMR 391): Held that revenue proceedings are summary in nature and cannot adjudicate fraud.  
2. Rasta Mal Khan Vs. Nabi Sarwar Khan (1996 SCMR 78): Discussed limitations on Civil Court jurisdiction in revenue matters.  

The Petitioner argued that since the private Respondents’ Civil Suit for declaration was dismissed on 07.11.2022, it automatically established fraud in the mutations. However, the Court ruled that dismissal due to lack of evidence (under Order XVII Rule 3, CPC) does not validate fraud allegations.  

The Court also dismissed the Petition on technical grounds, holding that:  

1. The impugned revenue order was appealable under the Land Revenue Act, and a constitutional petition is not maintainable where an adequate Appellate remedy exists.  
2. The Petitioner had previously filed [W.P. No. 60491/2021], which was withdrawn without disclosure a move the Court deemed misleading and grounds for denying equitable relief.  
3. Constitutional petitions cannot bypass statutory appeal processes unless no adequate remedy is available.  

The Lahore High Court dismissed the Writ Petition, affirming that:  

1. Revenue officials cannot adjudicate fraud-based claims in summary proceedings.  
2. Fraud must be proven through evidence before the Civil Court.  
3. A dismissed civil suit does not automatically prove fraud.  

Failure to disclose previous petitions may disentitle a party from equitable relief.

Powered by Froala Editor