| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1991 SLD 1893 = 1991 CLC 2110 |
Lahore High Court
Regular Second Appeal No.157 of 1987, decided on 19th June, 1991.
Presented By: Before Muhammad Ilyas, J.
Syed Iftikhar Ahmad for Appellants. Muhammad Zafar Chaudhry for
Respondent.
Regular Second Appeal No.157 of 1987, decided on 19th June, 1991.
Presented By: Before Muhammad Ilyas, J.
Syed Iftikhar Ahmad for Appellants. Muhammad Zafar Chaudhry for
Respondent.
MUZAFFAR ALI and 2 others---Appellants
VERSUS
Ch. ASGHAR ALI --- Respondent
Law: Oaths Act, 1873
Section: 10
Oaths Act (X of 1873)--- ----S. 10---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 12---Suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell land---Two out of three plaintiffs and their counsel, stated during the pendency of suit, that if the respondent made a special oath, on the Holy Quran, to the effect that he had not signed or thumb marked the deed in respect of the agreement in question nor did he receive any amount in connection with the said agreement, they would have no objection to the dismissal of their suit---Offer of the two plaintiffs was accepted by respondent and Local Commissioner submitted the report which was read by the parties who raised no objection thereto and suit accordingly was dismissed by the trial Court---Plaintiffs in second appeal before the High Court contended that respondent had practised fraud on the Trial Court in securing decision in his favour and therefore, the judgment and decree passed by Trial Court deserved to be set aside---Argument of plaintiffs was that in another suit which was for partition of land, including the land involved in the agreement in dispute, the respondent had made an application admitting receipt of certain amount of money and, therefore, he had lied while making oath to the effect that he was not paid anything in respect of the agreement in dispute---Held, initiative in connection with the decision of the suit on the basis of special oath was taken by the appellants/plaintiffs, obviously when they made an offer in that behalf although it was known to them that in the said application respondent had admitted the receipt of certain amount, and despite all that, they offered to settle the dispute on the basis of special oath prescribed by them---Respondent simply accepted their offer and it was difficult to say that while so doing, he had played fraud on the Court---Plea of fraud was an afterthought and in fact an attempt on the part of plaintiffs/appellants to wriggle out of the solemn commitment made by them. Saleem Ahmad v. Khushi Muhammad 1974 SCMR 224 and Asifa Sultana v. Honest Traders, Lahore and another PLD 1970 SC 331 distinguished. Oaths Act (X of 1873)--- ----S.10----Civil Procedure…