| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2001 SLG 1312 2001 SLD 1312 2001 SCMR 265 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No.99-Q of 1994, decision dated: 21st September, 2000. (On appeal from the order, dated 16-9-1993 passed by the Balochistan High Court, Quetta in R. F. A. No. 15 of 1993)
MUHAMMAD BASHIR, JEHANGIRI, ACTG. C.J., MUNIR A. SHEIKH AND NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI, JJ
Appellants in person. M.K.N. Kohli, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent
Civil Appeal No.99-Q of 1994, decision dated: 21st September, 2000. (On appeal from the order, dated 16-9-1993 passed by the Balochistan High Court, Quetta in R. F. A. No. 15 of 1993)
MUHAMMAD BASHIR, JEHANGIRI, ACTG. C.J., MUNIR A. SHEIKH AND NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI, JJ
Appellants in person. M.K.N. Kohli, Advocate-on-Record for
Respondent
DILBER HUSSAIN HASHMI and another
VS
MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK, SHAHRA-EIQBAL BRANCH, QUETTA
Law:
Section:
(a) Contract Act (IX of 1872)--- ----S. 15---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)---Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to consider whether there was sufficient oral and documentary evidence to justify to hold that the relevant documents and mortgage deed was obtained from the appellants under coercion and duress. (b) Contract Act (IX of 1872)--- ----S. 15---"Coercion"----Defined. The term "coercion" is defined in section 15 of the Contract Act. It means committing or threatening to commit any act forbidden by the Pakistan Penal Code or unlawful detaining or threatening to detain any property to the prejudice of any person whatever, with the intention of causing any person to enter into an agreement. (c) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 39---Contract Act (IX of 1872), S. 15---Cancellation of document--Plea of coercion and duress---Concurrent findings of both the Courts below---Appellants misappropriated certain amount and during criminal proceedings acknowledged their liability to the tune of Rs.366,534.59 and executed the disputed mortgage deed---Mere fact that agreement was entered into under fear of a criminal proceedings was not sufficient to avoid the agreement on the ground of coercion, and that simply because a creditor threatened his debtor to involve him in a criminal case---Where there were some basis for the prosecution, the same would not be "coercion"--Documents in question, held, were executed voluntarily in circumstances. Rameshwar Marwari v. Upendranath Das Sarkar AIR 1926 Cal. 455 and Kazi Noor Muhammad v. Pir Abdul Sattar Jan PLD 1959 Kar. 348 ref. JUDGMENT NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI, J. ---This appeal by leave of this Court is directed against the judgment and decree, dated 14-9-1993 and 16-9-1993 respectively, passed by a learned Division Bench, High Court of Balochistan, Quetta in R.F.A. No. 15 of 1993. 2. Leave to appeal was granted on 20-12-1994 by a Full Bench of this Court to consider that whether there was sufficient oral and documentary evidence to justify to hold that the relevant documents and mortgage deed were obtained from the appellants under coercion and duress. 3. Appellant No.2 Syed Mahmood Ali Shah is…
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