 |
| Specific performance rejected |
| | | | |
| Citation Name : 2025 CLC 196 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE | | Side Appellant : GHULAM HASSAN | | Side Opponent : IJAZ NASEER | | | | | | Ss. 21 & 22---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 102 & 103---specific performance of agreement to sell, refusal of---Discretion---Documentary and oral evidence---Effect---Appellants / defendants were aggrieved of judgment and decree passed by Trial Court in favour of respondent / plaintiff---Validity---Neither in plaint nor in agreement between parties there was any reference of previous litigation or plea of execution of agreement after such litigation or settlement of issue nor was the property described with reference to any previous litigation---In absence of foundation in plaint of facts pertaining to previous litigation and also particulars of revenue record and that of Excise and Taxation Department, with reference to such previous litigation either in agreement or in plaint, any evidence produced by respondent / plaintiff for such fact was inadmissible---Such important aspects of the matter and deficiency in agreement were ignored by Trial Court which had serious reflection on the fate of the claim under adjudication---Plea of oral agreement as to alleged commercialization of property or commitment to allow adjustment of commercialization expenses from sale consideration was not part of agreement, therefore, was inadmissible---Respondent / plaintiff did not prove that he had funds to pay balance consideration as relevant statement of accounts were not produced and only account statement pertaining to earnest money was produced---Respondent / plaintiff did not even tender amount in Court nor ever attempted to deposit balance consideration till passing of decree---Respondent / plaintiff's intention was visible and he had not proved his readiness and willingness to perform the contract by paying balance consideration, therefore, relief of specific performance could not be granted---High Court dismissed suit filed by respondent / plaintiff and set aside judgment and decree passed by Trial Court---Appeal was allowed, in circumstances. |
|
|
یہ مقدمہ بیع نامے (معاہدۂ فروخت) پر عمل درآمد سے متعلق تھا۔ غلام حسن (مدعا علیہ) کے خلاف اعجاز نصیر (مدعی) نے دعویٰ دائر کیا تھا کہ انہوں نے ایک جائیداد خریدنے کے لیے معاہدہ کیا تھا، لیکن مدعا علیہ نے اسے فروخت کرنے سے انکار کر دیا۔ ٹرائل کورٹ نے مدعی کے حق میں فیصلہ دیا اور مدعا علیہ کو جائیداد فروخت کرنے کا حکم دیا۔
تاہم، ہائی کورٹ میں جب غلام حسن نے اپیل کی تو یہ بات سامنے آئی کہ:
- معاہدے میں پچھلی قانونی چارہ جوئی یا کسی تصفیے کا ذکر نہیں تھا۔
- مدعی نے یہ ثابت نہیں کیا کہ وہ بقایا رقم ادا کرنے کے لیے مالی استطاعت رکھتا تھا۔
- مدعی نے بقایا رقم عدالت میں جمع کروانے کی بھی کوشش نہیں کی۔
ہائی کورٹ نے قرار دیا کہ مدعی نے اپنی آمادگی اور مالی استطاعت ثابت نہیں کی، اس لیے معاہدے پر عمل درآمد کا دعویٰ مسترد کر دیا گیا، اور ٹرائل کورٹ کا فیصلہ کالعدم قرار دے کر اپیل منظور کر لی گئی۔
For more information call us 0092-324-4010279 Whatsapp
Dear readers if u like this post plz comments and follow us. Thanks for reading .as you know our goal is to aware people of their rights and how can get their rights. we will answer every question, so we need your help to achieve our goal. plz tell people about this blog and subscribe to our youtube channel and follow us at the end of this post.
No comments:
Post a Comment