| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 2876 2024 SLD 2876 2024 CLC 347 |
Sindh High Court
High Court Appeal No.75 of 2012, decided on 20th April, 2022.Date of hearing: 31st March, 2022.
Before Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi and Abdul Mobeen Lakho, JJ
Saad Fayyaz for Appellant. Muniruddin Ahmed for
Respondents.
High Court Appeal No.75 of 2012, decided on 20th April, 2022.Date of hearing: 31st March, 2022.
Before Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi and Abdul Mobeen Lakho, JJ
Saad Fayyaz for Appellant. Muniruddin Ahmed for
Respondents.
Shaikh MUHAMMAD SABIR----Appellant
VERSUS
Messrs K.K. BUILDERS (PVT.) LIMITED and others----Respondents
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 6,11
Law: Limitation Act, 1908
Section: 3,113
Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877
Section: 42,54
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O.VII, Rr. 6, 11---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S.3 & Art.113---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Ss. 8, 42 & 54---Suit for specific performance of agreement, possession and injunction---Limitation---Rejecting of plaint---Scope---Respondents entered into agreement for sale cum transfer of partially completed building project with the appellant, who paid entire sale consideration to the respondents----Due to ailment of the appellant, respondents occupied the suit property---Appellant filed a suit for specific performance, possession, rendition of accounts and injunction---Trial Court rejected the plaint on the ground that the suit filed by the appellant was barred by limitation---Validity---Appellant had averred in the plaint that on 01.03.2007, he suffered brain hemorrhage and remained in hospital and was under treatment for a period of about 2 years, however, it appeared that nothing was produced or attached with the plaint to support such fact---According to appellant, on or about 10.04.2007, respondent No.2 with the help of his persons removed his staff from the premises and illegally took over all record and account books and controlled possession of the project---However, when the respondents failed to perform their part of the contract to handover the possession of the subject property, the appellant filed the subject suit seeking specific performance---It was claimed by the appellant that cause of action first accrued on 10.04.2007 when the respondents allegedly dispossessed the appellant from the subject property, and for all practical purposes refused performance of the agreement between the parties---As such, it could safely be concluded that the performance of contract was refused on 10.04.2007, thus time began to run from that date under Art. 113 of Limitation Act, 1908---However, admittedly the appellant did not file the suit for specific performance within the period of limitation as provided under law i.e. three years, nor took any steps or even took a plea that appellant was prevented by sufficient cause to file the Suit within the period of limitation, whereas, no application seeking condonation of…
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