1989 PLP 21 (MLD)
SHAMA ENTERPRISES (PRIVATE) LTD — Appellant Versus Malik GHULAM SARWAR and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 21 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian and Ahmed Ali U. Qureshi, JJ |
| Parties | SHAMA ENTERPRISES (PRIVATE) LTD — Appellant Versus Malik GHULAM SARWAR and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 21 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 21 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Ajmal Mian and Ahmed Ali U. Qureshi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 21 (MLD) (SHAMA ENTERPRISES (PRIVATE) LTD — Appellant Versus Malik GHULAM SARWAR and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Atash Mirza for Appellant.
Headnotes / Summary
O.XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2--Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.12--Temporary injunction--Suit for specific performance of sale agreement--When appellant seeks an injunction in respect of suit property, Court normally would order deposit of balance of sale consideration in Court in order to see whether factually plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of sale agreement in respect of which spec performance was sought.
Judgment & Decree
O.XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2--Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.12--Temporary injunction--Suit for specific performance of sale agreement--When appellant seeks an injunction in respect of suit property, Court normally would order deposit of balance of sale consideration in Court in order to see whether factually plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of sale agreement in respect of which spec performance was sought. Atash Mirza for Appellant. AJMAL MIAN, J.--This is an appeal against an order dated 30-5-1988 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court m Suit No. 297 of 1988 upon C.MA. No. 2371 of 1988 dismissing the appellants's application for grant of ad -interim injunction in respect of the suit land, which has been filed by the appellant for specific performance of a sale agreement, dated 14th November, 1987 for land measuring 9.8 acres situated at Deh Joreji Tappo Darsano, Taluka and District Karachi East. The learned Single Judge while hearing the above application enquired from the appellant, whether he was willing to deposit the balance of the sale consideration m terms of the sale agreement, the appellant showed his unwillingness to deposit the balance of the sale consideration but stated that he was ready to furnish the security. The learned Single Judge dismissed the above application on the ground that the appellant was not willing to deposit the balance of the sale consideration. The appellant being' aggrieved by the above order has filed the present appeal: We have heard Mr. Atash Mirza, learned counsel for the appellant, who states that the suit has not been listed for final disposal and, therefore, the hearing of the above appeal may be deferred. We have noticed from the diary that this is the third date of hearing for Katcha Peshi. In a suit for specific performance when appellant seeks an injunction in respect of the suit property, the Court normally order the deposit of the balance of the sale consideration in the Court in order to see, whether factually the plaintiff was ready and willing to Perform his part of the sale agreement in respect of which the performance is sought. The order under appeal seems to be in consonance with law and does not call for interference. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed in limine. M.Y.H./5-301/K Appeal dismissed.