Case Details

Citation(s)
2014 SLG 1136 2014 SLD 1136 2014 MLD 342
Sindh High Court
Civil Suit No.831 of 2005, decision dated: 13-11-2012, hearing DATE : 28-05-2012
SYED HASAN AZHAR RIZVI, J
Abdullah Balouch for Plaintiff. Wafi Khan for Defendant.

Syed ADNAN ASHRAF----Plaintiff

VS

Syed AZHAR-UDDIN through Attorney--Defendant

Law:

Section:

(a) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)---Arts.75 & 76---Document, proof of---Procedure---If validity of existence of document is disputed and original is not produced, certified copy is not admissible in evidence without proving non-availability of original and taking permission of court. (b) Power of attorney--- ----Object, purpose and scope---Power of attorney is written authorization by virtue of which principal assigns to a person as his agent and confers upon him the authority to perform specified acts on his behalf---Primary purpose of instrument of such nature is to assign authority of principal to another person as his agent. (c) Contract Act (IX of 1872)--- ---Ss.2(e) & 10---Agreement to sell property---Necessary ingredients---Four components to form an agreement to sell a property:- (i) identification of seller and purchaser, (ii) sale consideration amount, (iii) identification of property to be sold and (iv) parties to agreement to sell property at consensus ad idem. (d) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss.12 & 54---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.79---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell---Execution of agreement---Proof---Plaintiff claimed that defendant who was owner of suit property entered into agreement to sell and had received part payment against receipt, through his brother, in whose favour he had executed irrevocable general power of attorney---Plaintiff did not implead the attorney as defendant while the owner of property declined to have executed any agreement to sell as well as receipt of part payment---Validity---Both parties i.e. plaintiff and general attorney of defendant, were to contemplate sale agreement, after issuance of receipt dated 19-4-2004, which had not been admittedly executed between the parties---Relief in suit for specific performance was discretionary relief and could only be granted to party which had approached court with clean hands and had placed material on record to show bona fides on his part to perform contract---Plaintiff failed to establish that irrevocable general power of attorney was executed by defendant in favour of his brother, so also the defendant denied issuance of any…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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