Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 42

Specific Relief Act, 1877 (I of 1877)-- ----S. 42--Suit for declaration--Dismissed--Appeal--Dismissed--Suit property was a joint ownership--Privately partioned--Respondent was inducted in property as licensee till demand for vacation--Issuance of legal notice regarding vacation of property--Mandatory requirement--Construction on property--Challenge to--Law mandated not only to prove its execution through specific evidence, but also contents, if denied--Proof of signature of other party on questioned document also a mandatory requirement--For reasons that both agreements were got attested at same time, while witness (PW-3) was unable to state about execution of document, as they were not written in his presence, nor parties signed agreements in his presence--Thus he was unaware of actual transaction--Both Courts unable to focus on law, thus failed to appreciate requirements necessary to prove a document, and relied on documents only tendered in evidence, which otherwise were not admissible, nor any relief on basis thereof could be allowed--Law required that an instrument if pertained to some financial obligation and rendered in writing, have to be attested by two witnesses--Further mandated use of such document in evidence, unless at-least two attesting witnesses appeared before Court and be examined, and if witnesses are not available document is to be proved by other / evidence--In case in hand witness Agha Muhammad never appeared before Court, while other witness Shah Jehan though made his appearance, but unable to describe necessary details of transaction, nor even asserted execution of document, and it been signed by parties in his presence--He simply identified his own signature--Original document was also not produced, and his statement was never completed, thus was out of consideration--As far PW-3 Muhammad Jaffar was concerned, though attested both agreements, but he was also not with statement that at time of execution of both these documents either he was in attendance, or parties signed papers in his presence--Thus his evidence was of no legal effect--As far Report of Handwriting Expert was concerned, though it described genuineness of signature of…

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