Case Details

Citation(s)
2025 SLG 556 2025 SLD 556 = 2025 MLD 14
Sindh High Court, Sukkur Bench
Constitution Petition No. D-203 of 2024, decided on 24th April, 2024.
Before Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro and Arbab Ali Hakro, JJ
Ateeq-ur-Rehman Soomro for the Petitioner.
Respondent No. 5 in person. Ghulam Abbas Kuber, A.A.G. for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 4.

ZAFAR AHMED SHAIKH and others---Petitioners

VERSUS

PROVINCE OF SINDH through Secretary Revenue Department and 6 others--Respondents

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: I,12

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199

Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-------S.12---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Suit for Specific performance of agreement to sell---Balance sale consideration, deposit of---Object, purpose and scope---Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---Petitioner/plaintiff sought specific performance of agreement to sell regarding suit property but did not deposit balance sale consideration in Court---Trial Court and Lower Appellate Court directed petitioner/plaintiff to deposit balance sale consideration in Court--Validity---Absence of element of readiness and willingness on behalf of petitioner/plaintiff, could be interpreted as an attempt to evade his responsibilities under the contract---This was a crucial point in legal analysis, as it underscored importance of actions of petitioner/plaintiff in demonstrating his commitment to fulfilling his contractual obligations---Court's directive to deposit balance sale consideration was not merely a procedural requirement but a substantive test of bona fide of petitioner/plaintiff and readiness to perform his part of contract---Plea of petitioner/plaintiff was unanimously rejected by two lower Courts---Within the purview of Constitutional jurisdiction, burden of proof rested on petitioner/ plaintiff to demonstrate that orders of lower Courts were marred by jurisdictional errors or that Courts exercised their jurisdiction in a manner that was either unlawful or arbitrary---Petitioner/plaintiff was also required to show that significant irregularities were committed by lower Courts, which would warrant High Court's intervention under Art.199 of the Constitution---High Court declined to interfere in orders passed by two Courts below as there were no jurisdictional defects or procedural improprieties and invocation of High Court's Constitutional jurisdiction was inappropriate---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.Messrs DW Pakistan (Private) Limited, Lahore v. Begum Anisa Fazl-i-Mahmood and others 2023 SCMR 555; Muhammad Asif Awan v. Dawood Khan and others 2021 SCMR 1270; Rab Nawaz v. Mustaqeem Khan 1999 SCMR 1362; Muhammad Abdul Rehman Qureshi v. Sagheer Ahmad 2017 SCMR 1696 and Masood Ahmad…
🔒
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