Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 12,39

Specific Relief Act, 1877 (I of 1877)-- ----Ss. 12 ,  39--Suit for specific performance and cancellation of mutation--Sale agreement--Non-disclosing of date and non-mentioning of names of witnesses on sale agreement--Material contradictions--Misapplication of law--Challenge to--Respondent neither disclosed date of alleged agreement between parties nor mentioned names of witnesses in whose presence, alleged agreement was executed--Statements of P.Ws mutually suffers from material contradictions which impress to observe that respondent has failed to prove valid execution of alleged agreement to sell through any corroborative, believable concrete, solid and unimpeachable evidence--Agreement to sell shows that--It does not bear signatures of parties on its first page and only two thumb impressions of Bahadur are available on first page--Overleaf of alleged agreement to sell also does not speak out person who got issued same--It can conveniently be observed that respondent miserably failed to substantiate execution of alleged agreement to sell as well as payment of consideration through any convincing and trustworthy evidence which material facts have not been considered by two Courts below--Decisions of lower fora suffer from blatant misreading and non-reading of evidence as well as mis-application of law, as such, same are not sustainable in eyes of law--Appeal allowed.  1996 SCMR 137, 2017 CLC 70 ,  2016 SCMR 24 ref. JUDGMENT Through this Regular Second Appeal, the appellants have challenged the validity of the judgment decree dated 21.04.2004, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Mailsi who decreed the suit for specific performance of contract filed by the respondents and the judgment decree dated 06.10.2004, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Mailsi who dismissed the appeal of the appellants. 2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent/plaintiff, Mohabbat, filed a suit for specific performance of contract against appellants as well as other respondents/defendants contending therein that the Defendant No. 1, Bahadur, was owner of land measuring 98 Kanal 07 Marla bearing Khewat No. 36/94-min situated in Chak No. 198/W.B Tehsil Mailsi…

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