| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2003 SLG 2759 2003 SLD 2759 2003 CLC 1715 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revisions Nos.87-D and 88-D of 2003, decision dated: 12-06-2003.
FARRUKH LATEEF, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Revisions Nos.87-D and 88-D of 2003, decision dated: 12-06-2003.
FARRUKH LATEEF, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
MUHAMMAD NAWAZ and others
VS
MUHAMMAD RAMZAN and others
Law:
Section:
(a) Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)-------S. 54---Transfer of immovable property---Agreement of sale---Mere agreement in writing would not create any right, title or interest in immovable property irrespective of the fact that instalments of price of the property in dispute had been paid---Contention that agreement deeds were sufficient to prove title in respect of property, was repelled because transfer of immovable property, worth Rs.100 or more, could only be transferred by a registered instrument of transfer. (b) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----Ss. 42, 54 & 55---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.VI, R.17 & O.XLI, R.27---Suit for declaration, prohibition and mandatory injunction---Amendment in plaint---Additional evidence, production of--Plaintiffs, who had filed suit for declaration; prohibition and mandatory injunction, filed application seeking amendment in their plaint so as to include plea of adverse possession---Said application was rightly rejected by Appellate Court as plea of adverse possession was available to plaintiffs at the time of the filing of the suit. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 115---Revisional jurisdiction, exercise of ---Scope---Revisional jurisdiction was to be exercised against irregular exercise, non-exercise or illegal assumption of jurisdiction and not against conclusions of fact or law not involving question of jurisdiction---Findings of both Courts below were based on evidence and were supported by sound and plausible reasoning---Such findings could not be interfered with in revisional jurisdiction of High Court. Kh. Noor Mustafa for Petitioner Syed Hamid Ali Shah Mir for Respondents. Date of hearing: 5th June, 2003. JUDGMENT Civil Revision No.88-D of 2003 involving the same questions of law and fact will also be disposed of through this judgment. 2. Brief facts necessary for the disposal of these revisions are that the petitioners had filed two suits, one for declaration that they are owners of 1/2 share in Plot No.330 (disputed plot) by virtue of an agreement-deed executed by the late father of respondents who was its allottee and the other suit was for declaration that Muhammad Nawaz…
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