1990 PLP 439(1) (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD RAF[() KHAN‑‑Petitioner Versus MIRAJ DIN and 4 others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1990 PLP 439(1) (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid lqbal, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD RAF[() KHAN‑‑Petitioner Versus MIRAJ DIN and 4 others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Specific Relief Act (1 of 1877)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 439(1) (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Specific Relief Act (1 of 1877)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 439(1) (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid lqbal, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 439(1) (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD RAF[() KHAN‑‑Petitioner Versus MIRAJ DIN and 4 others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Ashraf, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Rana Maqbool Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 27th November, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur, dated 30‑9‑1984 in C.R.No.391‑D/BWP). ‑‑‑S.12‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. l85(3)‑‑Plaintiff's suit for specific performance of sale of land was dismissed as also his appeal and revision‑ Agreement to sell relied upon by plaintiff had not been established to be authentic‑‑Concurrent findings of fact were against the plaintiff‑‑No law point was involved in petition for leave to appeal‑‑Leave refused.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S.12‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. l85(3)‑‑Plaintiff's suit for specific performance of sale of land was dismissed as also his appeal and revision‑ Agreement to sell relied upon by plaintiff had not been established to be authentic‑‑Concurrent findings of fact were against the plaintiff‑‑No law point was involved in petition for leave to appeal‑‑Leave refused. Ch. Muhammad Ashraf, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Rana Maqbool Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 27th November, 1988. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Petitioner's suit for specific performance of sale of land was dismissed. His Appeal and Revision having also been dismissed, he has now sought leave to appeal.
2. It has been held that the agreement to sell relied upon by the petitioner has not been established to be authentic. There are concurrent findings of fact against the petitioner. No law point is involved. Leave to appeal, therefore, is refused. A.A,/M‑962/S Leave refused.