Law:

Section:

Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--------S. 12---Suit for specific performance of agreement of sale---Plaintiffs had filed suit claiming that defendant lady through her attorney executed sale agreement with regard to suit-land in favour of plaintiffs for consideration and had also received considerable amount from the plaintiffs---Defendant denied execution of sale agreement and receipt of amount from plaintiffs---Trial Court decreed suit, but same was dismissed by Appellate Court---Validity---Alleged agreement of sale-cum-receipt had not been proved in accordance with law as said document was neither mentioned in the plaint nor appended therewith nor relied upon--­Plaintiffs, even earlier, had filed a suit for permanent injunction, but said document was never mentioned therein---Marginal witnesses of said document had not been examined by plaintiffs without any good reason---Alleged agreement of sale was unstamped, was, not registered with Sub-Registrar and was not incorporated in any register of professional licensed deed-writer---Signature attributed to attorney of defendant when compared with signature of attorney on general power of attorney, did not tally---Handwriting Expert had also deposed that signatures attributed to attorney of defendant, were not in his handwriting---No evidence was on record to prove as to in which year, month, the day, the time and venue, the alleged agreement to sell was negotiated between the parties---Receipt of amount by defendant from plaintiffs had also not been proved---Appellate Court, in circumstances, had rightly dismissed the suit filed by plaintiffs against defendant. Sh. Khurshid Iqbal for Appellants. Malik Amjad Pervaiz for Respondents. Date of hearing: 29th January, 2003. JUDGMENT Appellants' suit for specific performance was allowed by the learned Civil Judge, through judgment and decree, dated 29-1-1994; appeal filed by the respondents has been allowed and by setting aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court, the suit has been dismissed. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants on 16-4-1989, brought a suit for specific performance with regard to 12 acres and 4 Kanals of land, situated…

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