Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 1208 2021 SLD 1208 2021 MLD 617
Islamabad High Court
Regular First Appeals Nos. 125 and 126 of 2017 and Criminal Original No. 180 of 2020, decided on 27th January, 2021, Date of hearing: 3rd December, 2020.
MOHSIN AKHTAR KAYANI, JUSTICE, FIAZ AHMAD ANJUM, JANDRAN, JUSTICE
Syed Javed Akbar for Appellants. Muhammad Wajid Hussain Mughal for
Respondents.

MUHAMMAD SAFDAR KHAN AND ANOTHERS

VS

MUHAMMAD NADEEM ABBASI AND ANOTHER

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 12,39,54

(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss. 12, 39 54--- Agreement to sell immoveable property--- Specific performance of contract---Scope---Payment of balance sale consideration---Scope--- Vendee instituted suit for specific performance of the agreement while vendor filed suit for cancellation of said agreement---Both suits were consolidated--- Contention of the appellant/vendor was that the agreement was liable to be cancelled, as outstanding sale consideration was not available with the vendee at the final/stipulated date so their matter was referred to the Jirga---Record revealed that huge amount (to the tune of Rs.22,000,000/-) was, admittedly, paid by the respondent/vendee to the appellant/vendor in pursuant to the agreement filed suit for specific performance within a week of the last date mentioned in the agreement for completion of the transaction ---In the suit for specific performance, amount (balance sale consideration) should have been available with the plaintiff and the respondent had deposited the same within the time allowed by the Trial Court while granting temporary injunction  could not bring anything on record that required amount was not available with the respondent---Evidence showed that when question was put to the witness of appellant regarding existence of Jirga, the answer was expressly made in negative---Suit filed by the appellant for cancellation of document was merely an attempt and an afterthought to counter the claim of the respondent filed his suit after more than one year and two months of the filing of the suit of the respondent ---No material was available except the said suit (for cancellation) that the agreement-in-question was cancelled---Stance of the appellant was not corroborated and substantiated by any tangible piece of evidence---Discretion exercised by the Trial Court was neither arbitrary nor perverse---No illegality or infirmity was found in the impugned and decree passed by the Trial Court in favour of the respondent/vendee---Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances. (b) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Preamble S. 12---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell immoveable property---…
🔒
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