Law: Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908

Section: 100

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984

Section: 17,79

Law: Transfer of Property Act, 1882

Section: 43,55

SUMMARY

The appellant instituted a suit for specific performance of the contract based on the agreement, which was contested by the respondents with averments that the agreement is forged; that the predecessor of respondents No.1(a) and 1(b) was not owner of the suit property when it was purportedly sold in the year 2008 and only obtained ownership of the same through an exchange, in the year 2010 albeit to the extent of 10-Marla, with respondent No.2. After recording of evidence, the suit was decreed and when appeal was preferred by the respondents, the former findings were upended, inter alia, on the ground that the agreement does not contain stipulation regarding registration of sale deed. Following substantial question of law has been raised: "Whether a decree can be passed in a suit for specific performance of contract, based on a written agreement to sell that does not contain a stipulation regarding registration of a sale deed in respect of the immovable property forming subject matter of the sale?" Held: the finding of the Appellate Court below is flawed inasmuch as in terms of Section 55(1)(d) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 ("the Act"), the seller (predecessor of the respondents), in the absence of contract to the contrary, was bound to execute the proper conveyance deed and in the present case, there was no such contrary stipulation in the agreement, therefore, the said predecessor of respondents No.1(a) and 1(b) was obligated to execute a registered sale deed.

ORDER