| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 3069 2016 SLD 3069 2016 MLD 647 |
Lahore High Court
C.R. No. 551-D of 2001/BWP, heard on 18th February, 2014. Date of hearing: 18th February, 2014.
SADAQAT ALI KHAN, JUSTICE
Jam Muhammad Sajjad for Petitioner. M.A. Rasheed Chaudhary for
Respondent.
C.R. No. 551-D of 2001/BWP, heard on 18th February, 2014. Date of hearing: 18th February, 2014.
SADAQAT ALI KHAN, JUSTICE
Jam Muhammad Sajjad for Petitioner. M.A. Rasheed Chaudhary for
Respondent.
AISHA BIBI - er
VS
ZAFAR IQBAL - --Respondent
Law:
Section:
Specific Relief Act (I of 1877) --------- ----------Ss. 12 & 22 --------- Suit for specific performance --------- Agreement to sell not written on stamped paper and signed by vendee --------- Evidentiary value/effect --------- Enforceability --------- Proof --------- Limitation --------- Trial Court dismissed suit --------- Appellate court decreed suit --------- Validity --------- Plaintiff witness claimed that he had received the sale price and handed over the same to predecessor of defendant/original owner as such witness was dealing with the matters of sale and purchase of the property of said owner --------- Said witness could not be believed as he had failed to prove himself as attorney of the original owner nor produced any document in this respect --------- Agreement to sell did not mention that said witness first received the sale price and then handed the same to original owner as such witness could not be believed to have received the sale price in presence of original owner --------- Neither marginal witnesses nor plaintiff signed the agreement to sell --------- Unilateral agreement not signed by the vendee was not mutually enforceable --------- Agreement in question was not enforceable at law as one of the parties to the contract did not sign or thumb mark the same --------- Agreement to sell having not been written on the stamped paper was liable to be impounded and had little evidentiary value --------- Plaintiff could not prove the agreement to sell --------- Pendency of litigation over disputed property on the basis of inheritance mutation was not sufficient ground for delay in filing suit by plaintiff who despite knowledge of litigation over suit property kept quiet for many years and did join litigation to claim his share/right on the basis of agreement to sell --------- Suit having been filed 28 years after the agreement to sell, was time barred --------- Appellate Court's was result of misreading and non-reading of evidence --------- Revision was allowed --------- Judgment of first appellate court was set aside --------- Judgment passed by Trial Court was restored. Mst. Gulshan Hamid v. Kh. Abdul Rehman and others 2010 SCMR 334; Faqeer…
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