Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 42,54

(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss. 42 54---Suit for declaration and permanent injunction---Sale transaction with illiterate housewives /Pardanashin ladies---Proof---Appellant (alleged vendee) claimed that he purchased the suit property from the respondent, who was the General Power of Attorney (GPA) of the plaintiffs (two illiterate housewives)---Plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration with permanent injunction against the appellant stating therein that they were the owners in possession of the suit property and that they never sold the suit property to the appellant---[Per Ayesha A. Malik [Majority view]: Appellant admitted that plaintiffs were illiterate housewives and resided in the same vicinity; he also admitted that respondent was a property agent and that he had purchased other properties from him in the past---Appellant did not produce any evidence of the sale in his favour as there were no witnesses to the sale or payment of the sale consideration nor does the revenue record detiail the sale and payment of sale consideration in the presence of the revenue officer---Furthermore, the appellant relied on a mutation being a copy of the Register Dakhal Kharaj Mahaal to show that the suit property was sold to him by respondent---Said mutation providesd that there was an oral sale through the GPA but gave no details of the oral sale and simply mentioned the sale consideration of Rs. 148,000/----Register Dakhal Kharaj Mahaal was an incomplete document as the report mentioned in Column No.14 was not relied upon by the appellant to establish the oral sale in his favour---There was also no report by the revenue officer to verify the oral sale in favour of the appellant---Furthermore, the mere fact that the GPA was executed did not establish the sale in favour of the appellant, as he was required to provide independent evidence of the oral sale in his favour---Importantly the GPA did not appear in Court, nor did any witness to establish the oral sale---Since the appellant and respondent were known to each other and had been doing business together, therefore, the element of the fraud with the plaintiffs could not be ruled out---In this case, there was…

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