Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 185(3)

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 12

Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)---S. 12---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Suit for specific performance of oral agreement to sell---Plaintiff had failed to produce trustworthy, cogent and independent evidence to prove payment of the earnest money and that she was willing and ready to perform her part of agreement---High Court, after legally appreciating the evidence on record and taking into consideration every aspect of the case, had rightly affirmed the findings of the first Appellate Court---Plaintiff could not point out any misreading or non-reading of evidence on record justifying interference by Supreme Court in the ---No legal infirmity having been found in the impugned s sufficient to reverse the concurrent findings arrived at by both the Appellate Courts, Supreme Court dismissed petition for leave to appeal. ORDER MIAN HAMID FAROOQ, J.--- Mst. Rehmu, the petitioner, seeks leave to appeal against the judgment, dated 3-3-2003, whereby the learned Lahore High Court at Lahore dismissed her appeal (R.S.A. No.102 of 1996). 2. Petitioner/plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of an oral agreement to sell, statedly, entered between the petitioner and respondent' No.1, against the respondents, in respect of land measuring 13 Kanals, 1 Marla, described in the plaint, inter alia, pleading that respondent No.1 agreed to sell the land in question to her for a sum of Rs.90,000, out of which, she (respondent No.1) received a sum of Rs.30,000, as earnest money, while rest of the amount was agreed to be paid at the time of attestation of mutation before the Revenue Officer and possession of the land was delivered to her (petitioner). It was stated in the plaint that on the same day husband of respondent No.1 also sold her holding to the petitioner, Mutations Nos.1096 and 1095 (Exh.P.2 and Exh.P.4) were entered on 11-8-1990, husband of respondent No.1 appeared before the Tehsildar and got the mutation attested but respondent No.1 absented and thus the mutation could not be attested. It was further asserted in the plaint that respondent No.1 transferred the disputed land to respondent No.2, for a consideration of Rs.80,000 vide Mutation No.1114…

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