Case Details

Citation(s)
2002 SLG 1516 2002 SLD 1516 2002 SCMR 1835
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No.873-L of 2002, decision dated: 8-04-2002
MUNIR A. SHEIKH, KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY AND FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, JJ
Malik Allah Yar Khan, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanvir Ahmed Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. M.A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent

Malik ALLAH YAR KHAN

VS

Mst. MUMTAZ BEGUM

Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)---- ----S.20 & O.VII, R.10---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.12---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)---Plaint, return of---Specific performance of agreement to sell---Territorial jurisdiction of Trial Court---Suit was filed at place "S" on the basis of certain receipt---Agreement pertained to the properties situated at place "C" but suit was filed at place "S"---Trial Court returned the plaint for presenting the same before Civil Court at place "C"--Appellate Court reversed the finding but High Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction upheld the order passed by the Trial Court---Validity---No mention was made in the receipts about the properties in relation to which the same were executed---Findings of Trial Court that the ,execution of agreement relating to any property at place "S" had not been proved and only agreement proved on record was in respect of properties situated at place "C", therefore, the order of return of the plaint was in accordance with law and did not .suffer from any illegality---Supreme Court declined to interfere with the order passed by the High Court---Leave to appeal was refused. ORDER MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.---The petitioner filed a suit for specific performance of agreement of sale allegedly executed in their favour by the respondent. The suit was filed in Civil Court at Sargodha alleging in the plaint that apart from Agricultural and Residential Property of the vendor situated in Chakwal she had also agreed through- the said agreement to sell her land situated in Sargodha. 2. The suit was contested on merits and also on the ground that the Civil Court at Sargodha lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit. 3. After framing of issues and recording evidence the trial Court came to the conclusion that in the agreement of sale enforcement of which was sought by the petitioner no mention had been made about the property situated in Sargodha as such it was found after considering the other evidence also relied upon by the petitioners that execution of any agreement of sale in respect of property situated in. Sargodha had not been proved and the only agreement proved on the…
🔒
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