Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 1758 2004 SLD 1758 2004 CLC 421
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No.2084 of 1995, heard on 23rd September, 2003.
SYED, JAMSHED ALI, J

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

IBRAHIM and another

VS

MUHAMMAD HAYAT and 3 others

Law:

Section:

(a) Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)-------Ss. 52 & 41---Transfer of property pending suit relating to sale of suit property was made by vendor its favour of subsequent vendee during pendency of suit filed by original vendee against vendor despite the fact that subsequent vendee had knowledge of pendency of suit---Claim of subsequent vendee to be bona fide purchaser for value had rightly been turned down. (b) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 12---Suit for specific performance of agreement of sale---Plaintiff vendees had claimed that defendant vendor had failed to perform his part of contract whereas they were ready and willing to perform the same--­Defendant/vendor claimed that plaintiffs were at fault---Appellate Court, after reappraising evidence came to the conclusion that defendant/vendor was in default and such finding of Appellate Court was adequately supported by evidence on record---Agreement of sale of suit property was executed in 1986, more than 17 years back and suit was decreed in appeal by Appellate Court after more than 8 years and revision against of Appellate Court before High Court took another 8 years--­Suit property was alienated by defendant vendor in favour of subsequent vendee in 1987 for consideration of Rs.50,000 whereas in favour of plaintiffs/vendees was sold in 1986 for consideration of Rs.35,000 and plaintiff had already paid Rs.12,000 as earnest money---High Court modifying and decree of Appellate Court, decreed suit for consideration of Rs.50,000 instead of Rs.35,000 and directed plaintiff, to pay Rs.23,000 balance sale consideration to defendant vendor within specified period. Zarina Chughtai v. Mst. Shahnaz Akhtar and 9 others 2003 MLD 640 and Haji Rehmat Ali v. Akbar Ali Hashmi and others PLJ 2000 Lah. 1408 ref. Rai Muhammad Tufail Kharal for Petitioner No. 1. Rai Haider Ali Khan Kharal for Petitioner No.2. Pervaiz Inayat Malik for Respondents. Dates of hearing; 22nd and 23rd September, 2003. JUDGMENT The judgment and decree, dated 2-10-1995 have been assailed in this revision petition which arises out of the following circumstances. 2. Pallu, initially respondent No.4, transposed as petitioner No.2, vide…
🔒
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