Case Details

Citation(s)
2011 SLG 2144 2011 SLD 2144 2011 SCMR 1009
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 771 of 2006 and Civil Petition No. 296 of 2006, decision dated: 29-10-2010
NASIR-UL-MULK, JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA AND MIAN SAQIB NISAR, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

MUBASHIR AHMAD

VS

. Syed MUHAMMAD SHAH through Legal Heirs

Law:

Section:

(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-------S. 12---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 117---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell immovable property---Defendant alleging transaction between parties to be for 'lease' of land and not 'sale'---Burden of proof---Burden would lie on plaintiff to prove that such transaction was an agreement to sell---Great caution would be taken before accepting evidence of oral agreement to transfer title in immovable property. (b) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 12---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 117---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Art. 113---Suit for specific performance of oral agreement to sell land---Defendant alleging transaction entered between parties in year 1973 to be for lease of land and not its sale---Proof---Burden would lie on plaintiff to prove that such transaction was an agreement to sell---Plaintiff filed suit in year 1982 after receipt of notice from Revenue Court issued on defendant's application seeking eviction of plaintiff from suit land---Plaintiff was enjoying peaceful possession of suit land since year 1974---Limitation for filing such suit would run from date on which defendant had refused to perform his part of contract---Defendant had purchased suit land in year 1973/74 for Rs.11,000--Plaintiff had paid Rs. 10,400 to defendant out of total sale consideration of Rs.14,000---Defendant had admitted receipt of Rs.9,400 through cheque---Receipt of Rs.10,400 by defendant from plaintiff, if accepted, would make implausible that, plaintiff would have paid such amount as rent for suit land valuing Rs.11,000---All such would show that oral evidence produced by plaintiff to establish agreement to sell had received corroboration from other circumstances of case---Defendant had failed to establish that suit land had been leased out to plaintiff---Suit was decreed in circumstances. Abdur Rashid Awan, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Raja M. Ibrahim Satti, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent. Date of hearing: 29th October, 2010. JUDGMENT NASIR-UL-MULK, J.---The dispute between the parties is over a piece of land, measuring 13 acres, situated in Taluka Digri, District…
🔒
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