| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1992 SLD 750 = 1992 CLC 293 |
Lahore High Court
Regular Second Appeal No.444 of 1978, heard on 12th February, 1990
Presented By: Before Mian Allah Nawaz, J
Khan Ghulam Muhammad Khan for Appellant. Malik Allah Wasaya for
Respondents.
Regular Second Appeal No.444 of 1978, heard on 12th February, 1990
Presented By: Before Mian Allah Nawaz, J
Khan Ghulam Muhammad Khan for Appellant. Malik Allah Wasaya for
Respondents.
NAZAR HUSSAIN SHAH--Appellant
VERSUS
Mst. JINDO MAI and 8 others---Respondents
Law: Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)
Section: 54
Law: Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)
Section: 42
Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)--- ----S. 54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 100---Sale of land through registered sale-deed in favour of plaintiffs' predecessor---Subsequent vendee/defendant claiming to have purchased the same land from the original owner---Two Courts below affirming sale in favour of plaintiffs/respondents-- Original owner not challenging such finding either in first appeal or in second appeal---Original owner having not controverted the sale in favour of plaintiffs' predecessor, same could not be seriously challenged by subsequent vendee who claimed to have purchased the same through oral sale as against plaintiffs whose predecessor had purchased the land in question through registered sale-deed prior in time---Findings of Courts below that plaintiffs were vendees with consideration of land in question was thus, not open to any exception. Mst. Walayat Khatoon v. Khalil Khan and others PLD 1979 SC 821 and Siddique Khan and 2 others v. Abdul Shakur Khan and another PLD 1984 SC 289 ref. Specific Relief Act (1 of 1877)--- ----S. 42---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XLI, R. 33 & S. 100---Suit for declaration of title without claiming relief for possession, where plaintiff had been dispossessed by defendant---Competency---Trial Court had ample power under O.XLI, R. 33, Civil Procedure Code 1908, to grant relief of possession to plaintiffs, whose title in property and right to recover possession was found established---Objection raised by defendant/appellant that plaintiffs having not claimed relief of possession their suit was barred, was mere fetish of technicalities having no nexus with the principle that Courts were required to do substantial justice between the parties---Concurrent findings of Courts below did not warrant interference in second appeal. Kiramat Ali and another v. Muhammad Younus Haji and others PLD 1963 SC 191; Zahoor Ali Khan v. Mst. Thakooranee Rutta Koer il MIA 468 and Zahoor Ali Khan v. Mst. Thakoorane Rutta Koer A.I.R.1921 P.C. 50 rel. Khan Ghulam Muhammad Khan for Appellant. Malik Allah Wasaya for Respondents. Date of hearing: 12th February, 1990.…