Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 100

Law: Municipal Administration Ordinance, (X of 1960)

Section: 26

JUDGMENT

FAIZ MUHAMMAD KHAN, J.-Municipal Committee, Bannu (hereinafter called the appellant) was owner of the vacant site (hereinafter called the disputed property), more particularly described in the heading of the plaint of Suit No. 221/1 of the year 1969, out of which this Regular Second Appeal rises. Mr. Munawar Khan, Advocate, who on his death during litigation has been succeeded by his legal heirs (hereinafter called the respondent), applied to the appellant for the grant of lease of the disputed property for a period of 33 years. The application of the respondent, as alleged in The plaint, was accepted by the appellant. According to the respondent, offer and acceptance' in respect of the lease of the disputed property was made and concluded between the parties and only the formal execution of a written lease deed remained to be completed, which the appellant, however, failed to execute. In reply to notice served by the respondent, as alleged in the plaint, the appellant replied that the lease in respect of the disputed property was cancelled by the Controlling Authority, who is defendant No. 2 in the suit. The respondent alleged that the Controlling Authority had no power to cancel the disputed lease, which had already come into existence in favour of the respondent.

Having no other course open, the respondent brought a suit for specific performance of the contract against the appellant.