Case Details

Citation(s)
1993 SLG 582 1993 SLD 582 1993 SCMR 462
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos.950 and 951 of 1990, decision dated: 21st November, 1992(On appeal from the judgment/order, dated 7-3-1990 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in R.SAs., Nos.308 and 5207 of 1983)
SAAD SAOOD, JAN, SALEEM AKHTAR AND WALI MUHAMMAD KHAN, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Mirza MUHAMMAD SHARIF and 2 others

Mst. NAWAB BIBI and 4 others

Law:

Section:

(a) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--Art.77---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Leave to appeal was granted to consider whether in dismissing defendants' appeal with regard to the sale-deed and the rent note, High Court was mainly influenced by the fact that both the documents were in possession of defendants, yet they had not cared to produce them in Court, that in the absence of original documents secondary evidence with regard to their contents was inadmissible under Art.77, Qanun-e-Shahadat, and to examine the contention of the appellants that the original sale-deed was in fact produced before the Court which after examining the same had allowed defendants to place a copy thereof on the record, and whether in the circumstances, it could not be said that original sale-deed was not- produced in Court by defendants, and whether High Court was not justified in decreeing the suit of plaintiffs with regard to the sale-deed at least. (b) Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)--­ ----S.54---Execution of sale-deed---Proof---Plaintiffs' witnesses instead of supporting their case contradicted them with regard to non-execution of sale-deed from which it could be safely concluded that plaintiffs had not come to Court with clean hands and part of their claim having been negatived by their own witnesses, their denial about the execution of sale-deed could not be accepted as gospel truth particularly when their predecessor who executed the documents before independent qualified deed writer and attesting witnesses and received consideration before the Sub-Registrar, during his lifetime, never challenged the documents in question or denied receipt of consideration--­Defendant appearing as his own witness produced original sale-deed which was returned to him by Court after perusal and copy of same was exhibited--­Defendant who had appeared before the Sub-Registrar at the time of registration of sale-deed and payment of sale consideration was not cross-­examined either about the due execution of sale-deed or payment of sale consideration before Sub-Registrar---Evidence on record thus, fully showed that sale-deed was duly executed by the predecessor of plaintiffs and…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492