Case Details

Citation(s)
2010 SLG 2726 2010 SLD 2726 2010 CLC 1776
Peshawar High Court
Civil Revision No. 444 of 2010, decided on 17th May, 2010. DATE of hearing: 26th April, 2010.
ZIA-UR-REHMAN KHAN, 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

NASRULLAH

VS

MUHAMMAD WAHID and others

Law:

Section:

(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 12---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.148---Suit for specific performance of agreement of sale---Fixation of period by Court for deposit of outstanding amount of sale consideration within prescribed period---Extension of time---Scope---Trial Court passed ex parte preliminary decree against -debtor and in favour of decree-holder with the condition that decree-holders would deposit outstanding amount of sale consideration within prescribed period of forty days---Decree-holders who failed to deposit said amount within prescribed period of forty days, filed application for extension of period for deposit of outstanding amount and Trial Court while exercising its powers under S.148, C.P.C. accepted said application extended the requisite period and allowed the decree-holders to deposit the amount---Decree­holders deposited said amount long after expiry of prescribed period and Trial Court passed final decree and -debtors were directed to hand over the possession of suit property to decree­-holders---Validity---Conditional decree was passed in favour of decree-holders and in the event of non-deposit of the balance sale consideration within prescribed period said decree entailed dismissal of the suit of the decree-holders---As non-deposit of the remaining amount entailed the penal consequence of the dismissal of the suit, Trial Court was functus officio and was vested with no jurisdiction to pass an order with regard to extension of time for deposit of the outstanding amount---Once the original decree was without jurisdiction and was the result of illegal act of the court, the entire edifice raised thereon, would automatically dash to the ground and crumble---Obtaining the final decree also would lose its importance and was of no use to the decree-holders---Judgments of both courts below being erroneous, not warranted by law and without jurisdiction, were set aside and the suit of the decree-holders stood dismissed. Mst. Sultana Begum v. Mst. Sadiqa Begum 2003 CLC 1705;Shujaat Ali v. Muhammad Riasat and others PLD 2006 SC 140; Waqar Mustafa and 2 others v. Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Mahmood and 2 others 2008 CLC 866; Bashir…
🔒
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