Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 17,17(2)(a) & 29

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 12

(a)    Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)-------Arts. 17(2)(a) & 29---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 12---Suit for specific performance---Agreement to sell, execution of---Proof---Claim of the plaintiffs was that the predecessor-in-interest of the defendants entered into agreement to sell with regards to the suit-property with them(plaintiffs)---Suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiffs, which judgment was maintained by the Appellate Court---Validity--Respondents/plaintiffs claimed decree for specific performance of (exhibited) agreement to sell but they (plaintiffs), in order to prove the execution of the same (agreement), had failed to produce its marginal witnesses and only produced two (such) persons in their evidence who were (actually) witnesses of alleged statement having been made overleaf (and not of alleged agreement to sell) incorporated/added after about two and half months of (date of) alleged agreement to sell---Thus, original agreement to sell had not been proved as per requirements of law as enunciated under Arts. 17 & 79 of the Qanun-e-Shahada,t1984--Document i.e. exhibited agreement to sell had been maneuvered only to deprive the petitioners (defendants) of their valuable rights---Both the Courts below had misread and non-read evidence of the parties and had committed material illegalities and irregularities---High Court set-aside the impugned judgments and decrees passed by both the Courts below, consequently suit of the respondents/plaintiffs for specific performance stood dismissed---Revision filed by the defendants was allowed accordingly.Hafiz Tassaduq Hussain v. Muhammad Din through Legal Heirs and others PLD 2011 SC 241 and Mst. Rasheeda Begum and others v. Muhammad Yousaf and others 2002 SCMR 1089 ref.(b)    Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-------S. 12---Suit for specific performance---Agreement to sell---Claim not agitated in life time of alleged executor---Effect---Claim of the plaintiffs was that the predecessor-in-interest of the defendants entered into agreement to sell with regards to the suit-property with them (plaintiffs)---Suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiffs, which…

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