| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2006 SLG 2184 2006 SLD 2184 2006 CLC 1161 2007 PLJ 94 |
Lahore High Court
Regular First Appeal No.365 of 2005, heard on 14-03-2006.
MIAN HAMID FAROOQ AND SYED HAMID ALI SHAH, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Regular First Appeal No.365 of 2005, heard on 14-03-2006.
MIAN HAMID FAROOQ AND SYED HAMID ALI SHAH, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
MUHAMMAD WASIL KHAN SHERWANI
VS
EHSANULHAQ SETHI
Law:
Section:
Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-------S. 12---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.VII, R.11 & O.XV, R.1---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell---Payment of earnest money---Defendant made a statement admitting the claim of plaintiff and stated that he had already received earnest money and had no objection to decreeing the suit if remaining consideration was paid by plaintiff within 15 days---Case was adjourned directing the plaintiff to appear in person who, despite providing various opportunities, did not appear---Rejection of plaint---Validity---Statement of defendant showed that he did not resist the suit and parties were not at issue on any of questions of law and facts therefore, under provisions of O.XV, R.1, C.P.C. the Court should have at once pronounced , thereby passing a decree for specific performance subject to the deposit of remaining consideration price within a period of 15 days---In presence of plaintiffs suit verified on oath and signed by plaintiff, there was no justification for adjournment of case and directing the plaintiff who was duly represented through his counsel to appear in person---Had there been any direction by Court for deposit of amount, then the plaintiff might have some case in the event of non-compliance---Defendant neither filed written statement nor had straightaway conceded the claim of plaintiff by making statement, such a case did not fall under any of the categories enumerated in O.VII, R.11 of C.P.C.---Plaint, therefore, was illegally rejected by the Trial Court---Impugned and decree was set aside and case of plaintiff would be deemed to be pending for decision afresh keeping in view the statement recorded by defendant. Directorate of Small Industries, Government of Balochistan through Sales Manager, Karachi Airport, Karachi v. Civil Aviation Authority through Director-General and another 1993 MLD 1836 and H. Gharibullah v. Mst. Mumtaz Begum and others 1990 CLC 1609 ref. Mian Jameel Akhtar for Appellant. Syed Imdad Hussain Shah and Muhammad Nasir Iqbal Siddiqui for Respondent. Date of hearing: 14th March, 2006. JUDGMENT MIAN HAMID FAROOQ, J.--- Present first appeal, proceeds against judgment andβ¦
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