Case Details

Citation(s)
2024 SLG 2915 2024 SLD 2915 2024 CLC 638
Islamabad High Court
R.F.A. No.163 of 2018, decided on 10th March, 2021.Syed Javid Akbar for Appellant. Raja Yasir Yousaf Abbasi for Respondent No.1. Misbah-ul-Mustafa for Respondent No.2.
Before Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb and Lubna Saleem Pervez, JJ
Syed Javid Akbar for Appellant. Raja Yasir Yousaf Abbasi for
Respondent No.1. Misbah-ul-Mustafa for
Respondent No.2.

MUHAMMAD AKRAM----Appellant

VERSUS

LIAQAT ALI KHAN and another----Respondents

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 12,54

Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss. 12 & 54---Suit for specific performance and permanent injunction---Transfer of suit-house---Time as the essence of the contract---Contractual obligations, breach of---Vendor or vendee---Determination---Vendee's inability for preparation (of cheque etc.) for payment of balance consideration---Effect---Suit for specific performance was decreed in favour of plaintiff/vendee---Claim of the respondent/plaintiff was that appellant/ defendant had backed out of his contractual obligation as he had not taken preparatory steps for the transfer of suit-house like not obtaining a No Demand Certificate from the concerned Authority (C.D.A.) being a pre-requisite for the transfer of any property---Validity---Pleadings in the written statement were silent as to the stage when the appellant/defendant decided to back out from his obligations under the agreements---Where agreements for the transfer of immovable property for consideration as huge as Rs.1,00,00,000/- are to be made, the parties generally interact for making arrangements for the transfer and payment of the remaining sale consideration prior to the target date fixed in the agreements---No documentary evidence was brought on the record by respondent /plaintiff to demonstrate that he had the requisite funds to pay the balance sale consideration of Rs.50,00,000/- by the target date---Generally pay orders or demand drafts are made prior to or by the target date fixed in the agreements to sell---In the present case, admittedly, no pay order or demand draft or cheque for an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- had been prepared by respondent / plaintiff by the target date---Agreements to sell, duly exhibited by the respondent / plaintiff, explicitly provided a specific date (10.06.2016) for the payment of the remaining sale consideration amounting to Rs.50,00,000/---Consequences for the non-payment of the balance sale consideration by said date were also clearly set out in the said agreements, i.e. the forfeiture of the amount already paid---An amount of Rs.50,00,000/- had admittedly been paid by respondent / plaintiff to the appellant when the said agreement was executed---Therefore, it…
🔒
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