Case Details

Citation(s)
2016 SLG 1188 2016 SLD 1188 2016 CLC 1258
Lahore High Court
C.R. No. 268-D of 2008, heard on 9th September, 2015. Date of hearing: 9th September, 2015.
CH. MUHAMMAD MASOOD, JAHANGIR, J
Khizar Hayat Khan Punian and Muhammad Masood Bilal for Petitioner. Mian Fazal Hussain Bhatti for
Respondents.

MUHAMMAD YOUSAF..........

VS

MEHMOOD and 2 others......---Respondents

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 8,12

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 115

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 72,74

(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877).......... ..........-Sections 8 & 12..........-Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 72 & 74..........Suit for possession and specific performance of oral agreement..........Proof of contents of document..........Secondary evidence..........Oral agreement..........Principles as to validity and proof..........Plaintiff filed suit seeking possession of suit property claiming that defendants had been in possession as his licensee..........Defendants later filed suit for specific performance on ground that plaintiff had agreed to exchange suit land with their land under oral agreement..........Trial court, through consolidated , decreed suit of defendants, and dismissed that of plaintiff..........Appellate court maintained decision of trial court..........Validity..........Ownership of plaintiff regarding suit property had been admitted by defendants by producing Register Haqdaran Zameen..........Defendants, in their written statement, had not mentioned that against how much property alleged transaction of "exchange" had been made..........Defendants did not plead date, month, venue and names of witnesses to explain as to when, where and before whom "oral exchange contract" had been settled between plaintiff and defendants; instead, only year of oral agreement had been mentioned..........Defendants, in their suit for specific performance, for the first time, had pleaded that oral agreement had been settled by plaintiff against different land owned by all defendants..........Defendants, in their suit, again failed to plead venue and names of witnesses to explain as to where and before whom alleged transaction had been settled..........Glaring major contradictions in statements of defendants' witnesses had badly damaged their case..........Defendants' witness had made statement in complete departure of stance as pleaded in their written statement..........Defendant's witness had mis-stated area of land which she had alleged to have exchanged with plaintiff against suit property..........Defendants had based their claim on oral contract without narrating basic ingredients..........None of defendants' witnesses had mentioned…
🔒
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