Case Details

Citation(s)
2019 SLG 2948 2019 SLD 2948 2019 CLC 1841
Sindh High Court
C.P. No. D-1496 of 2010 and M.A. No. 52 of 2009 in 1st CivilAppeal No. 04 of 1982, decision Dated: 13-09-2018. Dates ofhearing: 21st November, 2017 and 19th May, 2018.
MUHAMMAD IQBAL KALHORO, JUSTICE KHADIM HUSSAIN M. SHAIKH, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Allah Bachayo Soomro, Addl. A.G. (in appeal and for
Respondents Nos.4 to 8 in the petition).Jhamat Jethanand (in the appeal and for the petitioners in the petition.)
Respondent(s) by: Pir Bux Bhurgri (in appeal and for
Respondents Nos

AHMED AND OTHERSVSNAZIR AHMED AND OTHERS

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 11,12(2),O.VII,R.11,13

Law: Transfer of Property Act, 1882

Section: 54

Law: Registration Act, 1908

Section: 17

Law: Limitation Act, 1908

Section: 181

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S.12(2)---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell---Decree, setting aside of---Decree obtained without impleading a necessary party---Fraud and misrepresentation---Effect---Decree holder on the basis of agreement to sell did not acquire any right or interest in the subject properties unless sale deed was executed in his favour by the vendee or by the Court on behalf of debtor---If order or and/or decree was obtained by practicing fraud and misrepresentation then aggrieved person was left with no other remedy except as provided under S.12(2), C.P.C.---Court had to examine whether the facts and circumstances of the case required further probe into the allegations or not---If further inquiry was required to probe into the allegations then issues were to be framed and Court to record evidence---If Court was of the opinion that no inquiry was required then it could proceed to decide the application and it was not incumbent on the Court to frame issues in each and every case---Fraud and misrepresentation, in the present case, was apparent and no evidence was required to be adduced---Fraud could not be directly proved but it had to be inferred from the surrounding circumstances and conduct of the parties---If /decree or order had been procured without impleading a party whose rights were involved then such decree could not be allowed to remain in field---Impugned and decree were obtained by fraud and misrepresentation which were set aside---Application for setting aside of a decree was accepted and matter was remanded to the Trial Court with the direction to join the applicants as defendants and decide the suit on merits---Revision was allowed, in circumstances. 1993 SCMR 662; 1993 SCMR 2096; 1994 CLC 1135; 2015 CLC 1157; 2015 CLC 931; PLD 1989 SC 532; PLD 2012 Sindh 293; PLD 1989 SC 687; PLD 2001 Lah. 149; PLD 2010 SC 745; 2007 SCMR 459; 2007 SCMR 729; PLD 1963 SC 09; PLD 1985 SC 345, PLD 2002 Kar. 511; PLD 2010 Kar. 261; PLD 2006 Kar. 444; PLD 2012 Kar. 293-473; PLD 2017 Kar. 678; 2013 SCMR 338; 2012 CLC 4; 2001 SCMR 396; 1989 SCMR 640; Muhammad Nawaz v. Additional District Judge and others 2002 MLD 507; Mst.…
🔒
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