| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2015 SLG 2178 2015 SLD 2178 2015 YLR 1834 |
Sindh High Court
Suits Nos. 1291 of 2003 and 10 of 2004, decided on 20thMarch, 2015. DATE of hearing: 5th December, 2014
NAZAR AKBAR, J
Abdur Rehman for Plaintiff (in Suit No. 1291 of 2003). Habib-ur-Rehman and Ghulam Mujtaba for Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 (in Suit No. 1291 of 2003). Ejaz Khattak for Defendant No. 3 (in Suit No. 1291 of 2003). Abdur Rehman for Plaintiff (in Suit No. 10 of 20
Suits Nos. 1291 of 2003 and 10 of 2004, decided on 20thMarch, 2015. DATE of hearing: 5th December, 2014
NAZAR AKBAR, J
Abdur Rehman for Plaintiff (in Suit No. 1291 of 2003). Habib-ur-Rehman and Ghulam Mujtaba for Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 (in Suit No. 1291 of 2003). Ejaz Khattak for Defendant No. 3 (in Suit No. 1291 of 2003). Abdur Rehman for Plaintiff (in Suit No. 10 of 20
Mrs. SANA RIZWAN--PlaintiffvsMrs. AMNA FAHIM and 2 others----Defendants
Law:
Section:
Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S.12---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 17, 79 & 129, illustration (g)---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell---Agreement, proof of---Withholding of evidence---Plaintiff claimed to have entered into agreement with defendant regarding sale of suit property---Second instalment was payable by plaintiff to defendant within seven days after publication of advertisement inviting objections to sale---Plaintiff never published any public notice in newspaper inviting objections to her intended purchase of suit property, during 90 days period of time and therefore, did not offer to make payment of second instalment in breach of agreement---To the contrary, through a letter, plaintiff proposed that defendant should hand over possession of suit property immediately without further payment---Effect---Intention and conduct were going in directions which could not be termed as anything except an intended breach of terms and conditions of agreement of sale---Requirement of Arts. 17 & 79 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, to prove execution of contract by producing two attesting witnesses had not been done, therefore, reference to Art. 129, illustration (g) of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, was misconceived---Plaintiff herself had failed to produce the best evidence without explaining circumstances of her failure---High Court decided issues against plaintiff---Suit was dismissed in circumstances. Liaquat Ali Khan and others v. Falak Sher and others PLD 2014 SC 506; Ali Muhammad Khan (Represented by his Heirs v. Riazuddin Khera PLD 1981 Kar. 170; Malik Muhammad Yaseen v. Syed Raza Hyder 2014 YLR 1927; Choghata v. Fazal Din 1984 SCMR 1454; Kanwal Nain and 3 others v. Fateh Khan and others PLD 1983 SC 53 and Sughran Bibi v. Mst. Aziz Begum 4 others 1996 SCMR 137 distinguished. Sandoz Limited and another v. Federation of Pakistan and others 1995 SCMR 1431 and Muhammad Sharif v. Mst. Fauji alias Phaji Begum through Legal Heirs and another 1998 SCMR 2485 ref. JUDGMENT NAZAR AKBAR, J.---By this common judgment, I intend to dispose of Suit No.1291 of 2003 and Suit No.10 of 2004. Both suits were filed by the plaintiff namely Mrs. Sana…