Case Details

Citation(s)
2025 SLG 554 2025 SLD 554 = 2025 PLD 171
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 49002 of 2021, heard on 18th May, 2022.
Before Shujaat Ali Khan, J
Sh. Usman Karim-ud-Din for Petitioner. Imran Raza Chadhar for
Respondent No.1. Imran Ahmad Malik for
Respondent No.2

NASIR MAHMOOD---Petitioner

VERSUS

ZAFAR IQBAL and another---Respondents

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: I,12,39,42,54

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 148,XVII,3

(a)    Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-------Ss. 12, 39, 42 & 54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 148 & O. XVII, R.3--Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell, cancellation of document, declaration and injunction---Balance sale consideration, payment of---Noncompliance of Court order---Penal provision, invoking of---Extension of time--Principle---Previous conduct of party---Petitioner/plaintiff was aggrieved of order passed by Trial Court declining to extend time for deposit of balance consideration amount, resultantly suit was dismissed for not depositing complete balance consideration amount---Validity---When Trial Court invoked penal provisions of O. XVII, R. 3, C.P.C. due to non-compliance of order, no reference could be made to any previous omission or commission, if any, on the part of petitioner/plaintiff---In the event of non-compliance of Court s order, Court could invoke penal provisions of O. XVII R. 3, C.P.C. but prior to resorting to such penal action Trial Court should have satisfied itself that the party concerned had failed to comply with its order despite availing reasonable time---As per S. 148, C.P.C., Court enjoys power to extend period fixed by it for performance of an act by a party to the lis upon showing sufficient cause for non-compliance of its order within the stipulated period---Trial Court failed to exercise such powers despite the fact that petitioner/plaintiff filed application for extension of time to comply with order in question prior to expiration of period fixed by Trial Court---Such act of Court amounted to failure on its part to exercise power vested in it, which called for interference by High Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction vested under S. 115, C.P.C.---High Court set aside order in question and remanded the matter to Trial Court for decision afresh---Revision was allowed accordingly.Irfan Rasheed v. Muhammad Muazim and others PLD 2022 Lah. 372; Sultan Ahmad and others v. Khuda Bux and others 1986 SCMR 1005; Malik Hadayat Ullah and 2 others v. Murad Ali Khan PLD 1972 SC 69; Muhammad Nawaz and others v. Muhammad Sadiq and another 1995 SCMR 105; Muhammad Asghar v.…
🔒
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