| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1999 SLD 826 = 1999 CLC 1258 |
Lahore High Court
Regular Second Appeal No.727 of 1968, decided on 9th October, 1997.
Presented By: Before Ch. Ijaz Ahmad, J
Syed Abdul Hameed Shah for Appellants. Mian Muhammad Zafar Yasin for
Respondents.
Regular Second Appeal No.727 of 1968, decided on 9th October, 1997.
Presented By: Before Ch. Ijaz Ahmad, J
Syed Abdul Hameed Shah for Appellants. Mian Muhammad Zafar Yasin for
Respondents.
ERIC and others---Appellants
VERSUS
Hakim MUHAMMAD YOUNAS and others---Respondents
Law: Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)
Section: 12 , 100
Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 12---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.100---Suit for specific performance of contract---Second appeal---Both Trial Court and Appellate Court below, after proper appreciation of evidence gave concurrent findings of fact that agreement to sell land in dispute which was sought to be specifically performed, was duly executed between the parties---Interference in second appeal---Validity---Concurrent findings of fact could only be interfered with in second appeal under 5.100, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, on grounds that decision of Courts below was based on misreading of evidence or that it was result of perverse appreciation of evidence on record or that conclusions were arrived at after ignoring some important piece of evidence on record-- Appellants having failed to point out said defects in concurrent findings of Courts below, same could not be interfered with by High Court in second appeal. Abdul Sattar v . Mst. Sardar Begum 1992 SCMR 417; Sher Muhammad Khan v. Ilam-ud-lain 1994 SCMR 470; PLD 1983 SC 344; 1985 CLC 2994; 1984 CLC 2063; 1987 SCMR 1211; Muhammad Iqbal and others v. Mirza Muhammad Hussain and others PLD 1986 SC 70; Mirza Muhammad Ahmad Beg v. Mirza Amjad Beg PLD 1978 Lah. 421 and Ghulam Muhammad v. Lakha Sineh and Mst. Khurshid Begum v. Inam Rabbani 1979 CLC 570 ref. Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss. 12 & 22---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.100---Specific performance of contract---Discretion of Court---Exercise of---Second appeal--- Provisions of S.22 of Specific Relief Act, 1877 gave discretion to Court to grant specific performance of contract arrived at between parties, but said discretion must be exercised on sound judicial principles and not in an arbitrary manner-- Appellate Court below by allowing appeal against judgment and decree of Trial Court had exercised discretion based on sound judicial principles without misreading of evidence and without ignoring some important piece of evidence on record---Appellate Court below by setting aside judgment and decree passed by Trial Court, having not committed any error of law…