| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2007 SLG 684 2007 SLD 684 2007 PLD 449 2007 PLJ 853 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No. 2525 of 2006, heard on 8th March, 2007
JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, J
Hamid Ali Mirza for Petitioner. Muhammad Rashid Ch. for
Respondent
Civil Revision No. 2525 of 2006, heard on 8th March, 2007
JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, J
Hamid Ali Mirza for Petitioner. Muhammad Rashid Ch. for
Respondent
HUMAYUN MIRZA
VS
Mrs. SHAHIDA A. RAJPUT and another
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: OrderI,Rule10
Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877
Section: 12
Law: Transfer of Property Act, 1882
Section: 54
Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S.12---Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), S.54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.I, R.10---Specific performance of agreement to sell---Second party agreement--Buyer on the basis of agreement to sell with owner of suit property, further entered into agreement to sell with respondent---Buyer filed suit for specific performance of agreement to sell, wherein respondent filed application under O.I, R.10, C.P.C. for becoming a party to the suit---Trial Court allowed the application and directed to implead the respondent as a party to the suit---Plea raised by owner of suit property was that there was no clause in the agreement whereby buyer could further enter into agreement to sell with any other party---Validity---In agreement where second party had specifically been granted authority to enter into agreement with a third party without intervention of original owner, such clause amounted to purchaser being authorized attorney of the original owner capable of executing agreement as of right, in favour of third parties---No such clause was available in the agreement between the buyer and respondent---Mere agreement to sell did not, by itself, could create any interest in the property which was subject matter of such agreement---Agreement to sell between the owner and buyer did not confer any right or interest in favour of respondent---Buyer who herself did not have any interest in the suit property could not enter into any agreement for the sale of the same---High Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction set aside the order passed by Trial Court and application of respondent filed under O.I, R.10, C.P.C. was dismissed---Revision was allowed in circumstances. Sana Ullah v. Rashid Ahmad Khokhar and 3 others 2000 SCMR 937 distinguished. JUDGMENT JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, J.---Humayun Mirza petitioner-plaintiff impugns the order of the learned trial Court dated 1-12-2006, whereby an application filed by Mst. Azra Asghar (respondent No.2) under Order I, Rule 10 CPC has been allowed and she has been directed to be impleaded as a defendant in the suit. 2. The petitioner filed a suit on 31-5-2003 praying, inter alia, for annulment…
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