Case Details

Citation(s)
2016 SLG 929 2016 SLD 929 2016 CLC 120
Sindh High Court
Suit No. 340 of 2008 and C.M.A. No. 661 of 2007, decided on 27th February, 2015. Date of hearing: 27th February, 2015.
NAZAR AKBAR, J
Iftikhar Javed Qazi for Plaintiff. Ayaz Ali for Defendant.

Mrs. GHAZALA ARIF--Plaintiff

VS

MUHAMMAD AFTAB--Defendant

Law:

Section:

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 14---Suit for specific performance of a contract---Temporary injunction, grant of---Contents of plaint confirmed that there was no written agreement of sale---Plaintiff entered into an agreement in writing to purchase school from a person who was a tenant of suit property---Agreement to purchase school was in writing but agreement to purchase suit property was not in writing---Plaintiff did not even disclose the name of witnesses, if any, before whom she entered into an oral agreement of sale---Plaintiff's possession of suit property cannot be termed as possession in terms of part performance of agreement to sell---Different receipts of payment cannot be termed as payment receipts as neither they are stamped nor witnessed by any one---Conduct of plaintiff in pursuing the case and perusal of documents depicted that plaintiff had no prima facie case---Held---Plaintiff's use of suit property commercially did not confer any ownership rights on her in suit property---Plaintiff could not be allowed to retain possession without equitable security provided to actual owner i.e. defendant who was deprived of his ownership right---Plaintiff in terms of O.XXXIX, R.2(2), C.P.C. was directed to deposit in court monthly amount as security to retain possession and also to deposit the balance of sale consideration---Application, disposed of accordingly. (b) Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance (XVII of 1979)--- ----S. 13---Ejectment petition---Nature---Ejectment proceeding was independent to proceeding of a suit for specific performance of a contract of sale---Order passed in civil suit could not defeat the orders of ejectment passed by Rent Controller on the ground of pendency of civil suit. ORDER NAZAR AKBAR, J.--- 1. This suit for specific performance was filed on 20-11-2006. It is alleged that the plaintiff has paid only Rs.7,30,000 and as per her own showing she was required to pay an amount of Rs.59,70,000 towards balance sale consideration which she has neither deposited in Court nor she offered to deposit the same. She claims that she is in possession of the suit…
🔒
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