| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2005 SLG 1203 2005 SLD 1203 2005 SCMR 738 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petitions Nos.309 and 311/L of 2003, decision dated: 10-06-2003
MUNIR A. SHEIKH, JAVED IQBAL AND FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Petitions Nos.309 and 311/L of 2003, decision dated: 10-06-2003
MUNIR A. SHEIKH, JAVED IQBAL AND FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
MUHAMMAD KHAN
VS
. SALEHUN alias SALEH MUHAMMAD
Law:
Section:
Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)------S. 12---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S.14 & Art.113---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell---Limitation---Agreement to sell was executed on 13-12-1976---Plaintiff on 31-1-1977 filed application for making award rule of Court in respect of sale agreement---Trial Court dismissed the application adjudging sale agreement to be forged---Plaintiff on 8-8-1988 filed suit for specific performance of sale agreement in view of the observation made by Supreme Court in a petition filed against dismissal of such application by Courts below that sale agreement should not have been adjudged to be forged in arbitration proceedings, for which plaintiff, if so wanted, could seek remedy on basis thereof---Defendants' objection was that suit was time-barred---Trial Court decreed suit, which decree was upheld by Appellate Court and in revision by High Court---Contention of defendant was that question of limitation had not been decided in accordance with law as Courts below had mechanically proceeded on assumption as if such observation of Supreme Court did constitute a decision about condonation of delay in filing suit, while such question should have been decided independently keeping in view facts and circumstances of case; that arbitration proceedings suffering from mala fide could not be termed to be proceedings prosecuted in good faith; and his evidence had been closed, but certified copies of arbitration proceedings produced in evidence found mention therein a finding to the effect that there was no arbitration agreement, but Courts below had not applied their mind to such aspect of the case that plaintiff was not prosecuting such application in good faith---Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine, inter alia, such points raised by defendant. Akhtar Masood Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Date of hearing: 10th June, 2003. ORDER MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.--- By this common judgment, we propose to decide both these petitions involving identical questions of law and facts. 2. The respondent on 8-8-1988 filed suit for…
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