Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 17(2)(a),74,79,129(8)(g)

Law: Transfer of Property Act, 1882

Section: 54

Law: Registration Act, 1908

Section: 47

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.XIII,R.4

(a) Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)--- ----Arts. 17(2)(a), 79 & 129(g)---Failure of plaintiff to examine in Court one marginal witness of document without giving any explanation therefor---Effect---Such conduct of plaintiff would tantamount to withholding of best evidence, for which presumption could be drawn against him under Art. 129(8) of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XIII, R.4---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 74---Photo of document produced in evidence without taking permission from Court for secondary evidence---Validity---Such document could not be taken in evidence. (c) Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)--- ----S. 54---Agreement of sale, execution of---Proof---Notice by vendee to vendor informing him to come to office of Sub-registrar for completion of transaction---Notice returned back un-served---Unilateral appearance of vendor before Sub-Registrar and marking of his presence there---Validity---Such unilateral appearance of vendor would not be taken as proof of execution of agreement, which would be proved by vendee in accordance with law. (b) Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)--- ----S. 52---Registration Act (XVI of 1908), S.47---Filing of suit on 17-4-1982---Execution of sale-deed on 13-4-1982 and its registration on 21-4-1982---Effect---Such sale under law would take effect from 13-4-1982, thus, would not be hit by principle of lis pendens. Mst. Khair-ul-Nisa and 6 others v. Malik Muhammad Ishaque and 2.others PLD 1972 SC 25 ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J.--- The suit for the specific performance filed by respondent No.1, against the appellant's predecessor Lal Din and respondent No.2, has been decreed by the learned trial Court on 19-12-1987; the appeal of the appellants has also failed on 27-9-2000. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 17-4-1982, respondent No.1, brought a suit for the specific performance against respondent No.2., claiming, that the latter vide agreement, dated 8-12-1981, had agreed to sell the suit-land measuring 95 Kanals, one Marla (described in the plaint) to him for a total consideration of Rs.65,000, out of which, he had received an…

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