Case Details

Citation(s)
2025 SLG 3317 2025 SLD 3317
Peshawar High Court
CR No. 183-M/2016
SABIT ULLAH KHAN, J.
Present: Syed Abdul Haq, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Abdul Halim, Advocate for respondents. Date of hearing: 17.02.2025

(Muhammad Shoaib

VS

Mst. Hussan Zadgai and others)

Law: Pakistan Penal Code (PPC),1860

Section: 302, 324, 148, 149

Law: Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997

Section: 7

REMARKS

The purchase of land and the improvements made by the respondents in the disputed house have been established by them but there is no evidence on the record to suggest that the petitioner/plaintiff had ever raised any objection regarding the mentioned developments in the disputed area. The doctrine of acquiescence is an equitable doctrine which applies when a party having right stands by and sees another dealing in a manner inconsistent with that right, while the act is in progress and after the violation is completed, he cannot afterwards complain. In literal sense, the term ‘acquiescence’ means silent assent, tacit consent, concurrence, or acceptance, which denotes a conduct that indicates an intention of a party to abandon an equitable right and also denotes the conduct from which another party will be justified in inferring such an intention. Acquiescence may be either direct with full knowledge and express probation, or indirect where a person having the right to set aside the action stands by and sees another dealing in a manner inconsistent with that right and inspite of the infringement takes no action mirroring acceptance. However, acquiescence will not apply if laps oaf time is of no importance or consequence.

Summary:Two-word description: Appeal Dismissed

🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register