Case Details

Citation(s)
2010 SLG 2654 2010 SLD 2654 2010 SCMR 286
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos. 943 and 944 of 2002, decision dated:22-07-2009
Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, C.J., Ch. Ijaz Ahmed and Jawwad S. Khawaja, JJ
Mian Shah Abbas, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants (in both cases). S.M. Naseem, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent (in both cases).

MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN and othersVs.Dr. ZAHOOR ALAM

Law:

Section:

CH. IJAZ AHMED, J.---We intend to decide captioned appeals by one consolidated judgment having similar facts and law arising out of the common impugned judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 13-9-2001.   Detailed facts have already been mentioned in the impugned judgment and grounds of appeals. However, necessary facts out of which Civil Appeal No.943/2002 arises are that an agreement to sell was executed between the appellant/defendant and respondent/plaintiff on 15-6-1986 in respect of his immovable landed agricultural property measuring 24 Kanals 18 marlas 3 sarsaies situated in Chak No.197/R.B., Tehsil and District Faisalabad at the rate of Rs.1,07,000 per killa. Appellant/defendant received Rs.70,000 as earnest money from the respondent/plaintiff. A receipt was also written in token of earnest money. The time for execution of sale deed and payment of remaining amount of consideration was fixed from 15-6-1986 to 5.6-1987. The appellant/defendant was called by respondent/plaintiff on 4-6-1987 to execute the sale-deed through telegraphic message but he came on 6-6-1987 and refused to get the sale deed executed in favour of the respondent/plaintiff. Respondent/plaintiff being aggrieved filed suit No.21/1987 on 6-7-1987 for possession through specific performance of the contract dated 15-6-1986 in the Court of Civil Judge, First Class, Faisalabad. The appellant/defendant filed written statement controverted the allegations levelled in the plaint. Out of the pleadings of the parties the trial Court framed the following issues:--     "(1) Wh ther the plaintiff has got no cause of action and locus standi to bring the present suit?   Whether the suit of the plaintiff is mala fide and the defendant is entitled to special costs under section 35-A C.P.C? If so, to what extent? OPD.   Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a decree for possession through specific performance of contract dated 15-6-1986 on the grounds alleged in the plaint? If so, on what terms and conditions? OPP   Relief."   Necessary facts out of which Civil Appeal No. 944/2002 arises are that an agreement to sell was executed between…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register