1985 PLP 2102 (SCMR)
N/A
| Citation | 1985 PLP 2102 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain, Nasim Hassan Shah and Shafiur Rahman, JJ |
| Parties | N/A |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 2102 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 PLP 2102 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain, Nasim Hassan Shah and Shafiur Rahman, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 2102 (SCMR) (N/A). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Syed Tanseer Asghar, Advocate Supreme Court assisted by Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners (in Civil Petition No. 399 of 1981).
- M.A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents Nos. 3 & 4 (in Civil Petition No. 399 of 1981).
- Zaki‑ud‑Din Pal, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners (in Civil Petition No. 543 of 1984).
- Nemo for Respondents (in Civil Petition No. 543 of 1984).
- Date of hearing: 30th April, 1985.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment and order dated 20‑1‑1981 and 18‑4‑1984 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Writ Petition No. 6939 of 1980 and R.S.A. No. 704 of 1980). ‑‑‑Art. 185 (3)‑‑Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 12‑‑High Court giving two apparently inconsistent decisions on different dates between same parties in respect of same property‑‑Leave to appeal granted to examine soundness of these decisions.
Judgment & Decree
SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.‑‑Leave to appeal is granted to examine the soundness of two apparently inconsistent decisions of different dates of the Lahore High Court between the same parties in respect of the same property. In one (Regular Second Appeal No. 704 of 1980, decided on 18‑4‑1984) Ghulam Hussain the predecessor‑in‑interest of the respondents (in C. P. 543 of 1984) was for the first time granted a decree for specific performance of an agreement to sell the disputed property against Abdul Wahab the predecessor‑in‑interest of the petitioners. In the other (W.P. 389 of 1981, decided on 20‑1‑1981) the ejectment order against the successors‑in‑interest of the same Ghulam Hussain from a portion of the same property was left intact. The owners objects on various legal grounds to the grant of decree of specific performance by the High Court reversing the concurrent finding of the two Courts in second appeal. The occupants object to the legality of the ejectment order against them, once they are armed with a decree for specific performance of an agreement to sell the same property. Security Rs.1,000 in each case. Status quo meanwhile. M.Y.H. Leave granted.