Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.II,r.2,O.XLI,r.27,33,S.100,101

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.II,r.2,O.XLI,r.27,33,S.100,101

Law: Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

Section: 118,123A

(a) Contract Act (IX of 1872)-------S. 2---Valid agreement---Pre-conditions---For constitution of valid agreement there must be at least two persons i.e. promisee and promisor who agree with their free consent for a lawful object and legal consideration. (b) Contract Act (IX of 1872)--- ----S. 2(a)(b)(c)---Valid agreement---Scope---In absence of offer and acceptance, the same cannot ripe into an agreement. (c) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)--- ----S. 12---Contract Act (IX of 1872), S.2(a)(b)(c)---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XLI, R.33---Valid agreement---Proof---Moulding of relief---Plaintiff claimed that defendants entered into agreement to sell the suit property and had received earnest money---No agreement to sell was signed by defendants and plaintiff had only relied upon receipt of earnest money---Suit and appeal filed by plaintiff were dismissed by Trial Court and Appellate Court---Plea raised by plaintiff was that receipt was a proof of payment of earnest money with regard to agreement between the parties---Validity---Receipt neither fulfilled the requirements of agreement as defined in S.2(a)(b)(c) of Contract Act, 1872, nor stood the test of settled law---Receipt could at the most be construed as an understanding which could not be construed equivalent to a contract---Receipt could not be held to be an agreement within the contemplation of S.2 of Contract Act, 1872, therefore, no suit for specific performance could either be filed by plaintiff nor the same was maintainable---Plaintiff had proved payment of money to defendants, therefore, High Court, in exercise of power conferred upon it under O.XLI, R.33, C.P.C., converted the relief for specific performance into one as suit for return of amount---Judgments of two courts below dismissing the suit for specific performance of agreement and dismissing appeal by Lower Appellate Court were upheld---After converting suit into one for return of money the suit was decreed in favour of plaintiff. Ghulam Zohra and 8 others v. Nazar Hussain through Legal Heirs 2007 SCMR 1117; 1990 CLC 1877; 1995 CLC 327; Alexander Brogden and others v. The Directors & C, of the Metropolitan Railway Company 2 AC 666…

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