Civil Appeal No.188 of 2019 . 5 actually in his direct ownership, control and possession. He has not committed any illegality by not declaring the land that was only nominally in his name but was actually and beneficially owned, controlled and possessed by his father. The learned counsel has drawn our attention to the relevant land revenue bills and receipts showing that the same were being issued and paid in respect of land in his possession, ownership and control. The remaining land was being cultivated by his father who was receiving revenue bills and paying the same in relation thereto. He maintains that there is no dispute regarding authenticity of the said documents. The learned ASC further submits that the land in question disclosed by him was ancestral property that devolved on Respondent No.1 through a family settlement and any omission to declare the same in the nomination papers could not be fatal for his case. The learned counsel argues that there could not have been any ill intent or motive behind the omission of Respondent No.1 to mention the said land in the nomination form. He maintains that Respondent No.1 had declared 683 acres of agricultural land in his nomination form. He would gain no conceivable incremental advantage or benefit from hiding a few acres of land specially when the same was admittedly not even purchased by him but devolved on him and his children through a family settlement. He also maintains that Respondent No.1 was contesting election for the Provincial Assembly for the first time and was not fully aware of the requirement to be fulfilled in declaration of his assets. The learned ASC has emphasized that the Appellant