2002 PLP 3815 (YLR)
SUNSHINE ENTERPRISES (PVT.) LTD. through Chairman, Nasim Javed, Peshawar Cantt.‑‑‑Plaintiff Versus WEST PAKISTAN TANK TERMINAL (PVT.) LTD. through Chairman, Sadruddin Gangji, Karachi and others‑‑‑Defendants
| Citation | 2002 PLP 3815 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Shabbir Ahmed, J |
| Parties | SUNSHINE ENTERPRISES (PVT.) LTD. through Chairman, Nasim Javed, Peshawar Cantt.‑‑‑Plaintiff Versus WEST PAKISTAN TANK TERMINAL (PVT.) LTD. through Chairman, Sadruddin Gangji, Karachi and others‑‑‑Defendants |
| Primary Law | Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 3815 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PLP 3815 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Shabbir Ahmed, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 3815 (YLR) (SUNSHINE ENTERPRISES (PVT.) LTD. through Chairman, Nasim Javed, Peshawar Cantt.‑‑‑Plaintiff Versus WEST PAKISTAN TANK TERMINAL (PVT.) LTD. through Chairman, Sadruddin Gangji, Karachi and others‑‑‑Defendants). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Date of hearing: 8th April, 2002.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.12‑‑‑Specific performance of contract‑‑ Relief for specific performance of contract was an equitable relief‑‑‑Party seeking such relief had to show his willingness to perform his part of contract‑‑‑Party not ready and willing to perform his part of contract, could not ask for specific performance of contract by other party. Asghar Farooqui for Plaintiff. Rizwan Ahmed Siddiqui for the Intervenor. Muhammad Sadiq and Muhammad Shahid for Defendant No.4.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑S.12‑‑‑Specific performance of contract‑‑ Relief for specific performance of contract was an equitable relief‑‑‑Party seeking such relief had to show his willingness to perform his part of contract‑‑‑Party not ready and willing to perform his part of contract, could not ask for specific performance of contract by other party. Asghar Farooqui for Plaintiff. Rizwan Ahmed Siddiqui for the Intervenor. Muhammad Sadiq and Muhammad Shahid for Defendant No.4. Date of hearing: 8th April, 2002. The plaintiff filed suit for specific performance of contract dated 19‑12‑1997 executed between the plaintiff and defendant No.
1. Under the agreement the plaintiff had undertaken to clear the liabilities of the defendant No. 1 towards the M. C. B./defendant No.
3. The defendant No. 3 due to default on the part of the defendant No. 1 filed suit for sale of mortgaged property and obtained the decree. During the sale proceedings, the plaintiff filed application under section 12(2), C.P.C. for setting aside the judgment and decree, which was disposed of by order dated 5‑10‑2001, whereby the plaintiff was allowed 15 days time to pay the liabilities and get the mortgage redemption but failed to do so. Consequently, the mortgaged property subject‑matter of the present suit, has been sold by the Official Assignee. The relief for specific performance of contract is an equitable relief. The party seeking such relief has to show his willingness to perform his part of contract. The plaintiff got the opportunity but failed to show his bona fide. Today I further asked Mr. Asghar Farooqui, if the plaintiff is ready and willing to deposit the sale consideration in the suit. He shows inability of the plaintiff on the ground that the property has already changed. When the party is not ready and willing to perform his part of contract, cannot ask for the specific performance of contract by the other party. Consequently, the plaintiff is not entitled for the discretionary relief, therefore, the suit is dismissed, however, with no order as to costs. Civil Miscellaneous Application No.1879 of 2002 has become infructuous, which is dismissed. H.B.T./S‑233/K Suit dismissed.