| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1999 SLG 394 1999 SLD 394 1999 SCMR 1700 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 1714 of 1996, decision dated: 1st January, 1998. (On appeal from the judgment dated 8-04-1996 of the Lahore High Court passed in C.R. No. 2281 of 1994)
KHALIL-UR-REHMAN KHAN AND MUNIR A. SHEIKH, JJ
C.A. Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Hameed Aslam Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Kh. Muhammad Farooq, Advocate Supreme Court with Mahmood-ul-Islam, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent
Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 1714 of 1996, decision dated: 1st January, 1998. (On appeal from the judgment dated 8-04-1996 of the Lahore High Court passed in C.R. No. 2281 of 1994)
KHALIL-UR-REHMAN KHAN AND MUNIR A. SHEIKH, JJ
C.A. Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Hameed Aslam Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Kh. Muhammad Farooq, Advocate Supreme Court with Mahmood-ul-Islam, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent
AMATULLAH BEGUM -
VS
MUNAWAR AKHTAR, ADVOCATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--S. 12 ---- Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 144 --- Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3) ---- Decree in suit for specific performance of agreement of sale of property in favour of respondent and execution of sale deed in execution of the decree ---- Mere non-deposit of a part of consideration amount, the ownership rights in the property which had already been created in favour of a respondent by execution of a registered sale-deed in execution of decree for specific performance of agreement of sale which had not been disturbed or modified, the petitioner was entitled to receive the balance amount of consideration and nothing else ---- Petitioner could not claim ownership rights unless the decree for specific performance of agreement of sale and the sale-deed executed in pursuance therefore had been expressly set aside or deemed to have been set aside or a direction issued that till payment of enhanced amount of consideration the same would remain suspended and the parties shah be governed under the original arrangement. Contention of the petitioner in support of the petitions, in case of a suit for specific performance of agreement of sale of the property where the trial Court had decreed the suit was that non-compliance of the direction given in the passed in appeal of the petitioner for depositing the remaining amount of consideration, after adjustment of the amounts already deposited by the respondent having not been complied with within the time granted, therefore the respondent could not he deemed to have become owner of the property, as such, the parties were relegated to the position which they occupied before the institution of the suit i.e., the respondent would continue to occupy the property as tenant on payment of rent at the same rate on which he was paying before and the position of the petitioner as owner of property stood restored. The passed in appeal by the High Court which showed that the and decree of the trial Court as regards specific performance of agreement of sale was not either disturbed or modified but rather confirmed whereas the only modification made was that amount of consideration…
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