| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2022 SLG 252 2022 SLD 252 2022 CLC 73 |
Islamabad High Court
Civil Revision Petition No. 81 of 2013, decision dated: 24-08-2021, hearing date: 04-08-2021
AAMER FAROOQ, JUSTICE
Junaid Iftikhar Mirza for
Respondents Nos.1, 4, 5 and 7. Syed Nayab Hassan Gardezi for Applicant (in C.M. No. 686 of 2021). Abdul Wahid Qureshi for Applicant (in C.M. No. 747 of 2021).
Civil Revision Petition No. 81 of 2013, decision dated: 24-08-2021, hearing date: 04-08-2021
AAMER FAROOQ, JUSTICE
Junaid Iftikhar Mirza for
Respondents Nos.1, 4, 5 and 7. Syed Nayab Hassan Gardezi for Applicant (in C.M. No. 686 of 2021). Abdul Wahid Qureshi for Applicant (in C.M. No. 747 of 2021).
QAZI SIDDIQUE AKBAR THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS
VS
HASSAN AKHTAR AND OTHERS
Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)
Section: 79
(a) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--Art.79---Attesting witness---Suit for specific performance---Appellate Court(in second appeal) non-suited the petitioners/plaintiffs as they failed to prove the execution of the agreement and irrevocable power of attorney---Allegedly entire consideration amount was paid to the predecessor (deceased/respondent) of respondentss contended that there was no need to adduce evidence of attesting witness as respondents had never specifically denied the execution of agreement and said irrevocable power of attorney---Validity as witness had given no proof of alleged payment of the consideration amount nor stated the details of transaction admitted to have attended the funeral of predecessor of respondents but conceded that he did not make any claim about the transfer of property---Plaint showed that cause of action had recently accrued but in evidence date, time, place and name of person refusing transaction was not givens being the beneficiary of agreement and irrevocable power of attorney, were required to prove the said documents even though the execution of the same had not been specifically denieds could not rely on the weaknesses of the respondents’ case to substantiate their claim---Mere entrance of mutation of inheritance in favour of legal heirs of the respondent did not amount to notice of refusal to transfer the property---Claim was barred by limitation---Revision petition was dismissed accordingly. Muhammad Iqbal Khan v. Mst. Farhat Nisa PLD 2017 Lah. 727; Amjad Ikram v. Mst. Asiya Kausar and 2 others 2015 YLR 910; Ghulam Bheek v. Mst. Salamat Bibi and others 2001 CLC 1078 and Salamat Bibi and another v. Mst. Ramzan Bibi and others 2007 YLR 910 ref. (b) Limitation Act (IX of 1908)--S.3---Limitation---Duty of court did not adduce any evidence with respect to claim of petitioners being barred by limitation but under S.3 of Limitation Act, 1908 it was incumbent upon the Court to examine whether the claim was within limitation period. Khushi Mohammad v. Mst. Fazal Bibi PLD 2016 SC 872 and United Bank Ltd. v. Noor un Nisa 2015 SCMR 380 ref. JUDGMENT: AAMER FAROOQ, JUSTICE:---.--- The petitioners filed a suit for specific…
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