| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2004 SLG 2736 2004 SLD 2736 2004 PLD 269 |
Sindh High Court
High Court Appeals Nos. 305 and 306 of 1999, decided on 4th November, 2003, dates of hearing: 28th, 29th, 30th, 31st October and 4th November, 2003.
SABIHUDDIN AHMED AND AMIR HANI MUSLIM, JJ
Mansoorul Arfin for Appellant (in H.C.A. No. 305 of 1999). Neel Keshav for Appellants (in H.C.A. No. 306 of 1999). Aftab Alam for
Respondent No. 6. Arshad Iqbal for
Respondent No. 7. Manzoor Ahmed for
Respondent No. 8. Ms. Rukhsana Ahmed and Dilawar
High Court Appeals Nos. 305 and 306 of 1999, decided on 4th November, 2003, dates of hearing: 28th, 29th, 30th, 31st October and 4th November, 2003.
SABIHUDDIN AHMED AND AMIR HANI MUSLIM, JJ
Mansoorul Arfin for Appellant (in H.C.A. No. 305 of 1999). Neel Keshav for Appellants (in H.C.A. No. 306 of 1999). Aftab Alam for
Respondent No. 6. Arshad Iqbal for
Respondent No. 7. Manzoor Ahmed for
Respondent No. 8. Ms. Rukhsana Ahmed and Dilawar
ABDUL RAZZAK KHAMOSH
VS
ABBAS ALI and others
Law:
Section:
(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)---- ----S.42---Suit for declaration of right in property---Finding beyond the pleadings and dismissal of the suit on said ground was unsustainable. (b) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)---- ----S.42---Suit for declaration of right in property---Mere agreement for sale of property does not create title in favour of the purchaser. Habib-ur-Rehman v. Wahdania PLD 1984 SC 424 ref. (c) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S.42---Suit for declaration of right in property---Mere agreement to sell property does not pass order title in favour of the buyer in the absence of a registered instrument and does not constitute a charge on the property in his favour for the amount paid. Habib-ur-Rehman v. Wahdania PLD 1984 SC 424 fol. (d) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 42---Suit for declaration of right in property---Provision of S.42, Specific Relief Act, 1877 does not require existence of title in favour of the plaintiff but a declaration with respect to any right as to any property could be sought---Suit for declaration thus could be filed even though the title to property had not been perfected. JUDGMENT AMIR HANI MUSLIM, J.---Through this judgment we intend to dispose of both the above High Court Appeals. High Court Appeal No. 305 of 1999 impugns the judgment and decree passed in Suit No. 607 of 1998 filed by the appellant against the respondents in this Court whereas High Court Appeal No.306 of 1999 preferred by the respondents Nos. 1(a) and (b) impugns the judgment and decree passed by a learned Judge of this Court in Suit No. 985 of 1996 dismissing both the Suits by common judgment. 2. The facts as it appear from the pleadings of the parties are that the Respondent No.2, Government of Sindh, allotted 4000 square yards of the land to the respondents Nos.1(a) and 1(b) (Appellants in High Court Appeal No.306 of 1999) from Na-class No.210 on 31-12-1995 which was subsequently carved out, demarcated and surveyed and was given Survey No.309 in Deh Okewari Taluka and District Karachi (East). The land was allotted for the purpose of residential and/or commercial use. 3. The respondents Nos. 1(a) and 1(b) deposited a sum of…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492