Case Details

Citation(s)
2011 SLG 566 2011 SLD 566 2011 CLC 309
Peshawar High Court
R.F.A. No. 5 of 2010, decision dated: 24-11-2010
EJAZ AFZAL KHAN, C.J., AND MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, J

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

SAID AMIN

VS

Mst. NAYAB and others

Law:

Section:

(a) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)-------Arts. 72, 117 & 120---Document, proof of---Principle---Onus to prove---Where execution of document is denied by other party then heavy burden lies on the beneficiary of that document not only to prove execution of the document but- also its contents---Beneficiary is also required to prove that such document was executed by the person with his free will, without any undue influence and coercion. (b) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S.12---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 72, 117 & 120---Specific performance of agreement to sell---Proof---Old and sick person---Extraordinary measures---Effect---Plaintiff claimed to have entered into agreement to sell the suit property against payment of consideration---Suit filed by plaintiff was dismissed by Trial Court---Validity---Agreement in question revealed that vendor of suit property (since deceased) signed the document twice without any reason---Notary public attesting the document also confirmed that vendor had signed and thumb impressed the deed in his presence---Back of the agreement, which was separately exhibited in the statement of stamp vendor again revealed that the same was signed twice and thumb impressed by deceased vendor of property and again his signatures and thumb impression were verified by Oath Commissioner---Such factors too would be sufficient to cast serious doubts regarding extraordinary measures taken by plaintiff, as in routine nothing of the sort was done in such a manner---Entry of register of petition writer also reflected such like precautionary measures that he completely incorporated the agreement to sell in his register---Petition writer also made entry with regard to date, time and serial number of purchase of stamp paper by also writing name of stamp vendor---Such fact reflected that some extraordinary measure and care was taken to present the document like a genuine one executed by the vendor with his free will and independent advice without any coercion and undue influence---Plaintiff failed to prove genuineness of agreement to sell and payment of sale consideration through cogent and reliable evidence in absence of which claim…
🔒
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