1981 PLP 1416 (CLC)
ILYAS HQSSAIN‑Appellant Versus Civil Appeal No. 63 of 1972, decided on 7th August, 1979.
| Citation | 1981 PLP 1416 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ILYAS HQSSAIN‑Appellant Versus Civil Appeal No. 63 of 1972, decided on 7th August, 1979. |
| Primary Law | (a) Contract Act (IX of 1872)‑, (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1981 PLP 1416 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Contract Act (IX of 1872)‑, (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1981 PLP 1416 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1981 PLP 1416 (CLC) (ILYAS HQSSAIN‑Appellant Versus Civil Appeal No. 63 of 1972, decided on 7th August, 1979.). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abdul Matin and K A. Ghani for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
‑ O. III, r. 2 el. (a) [as amended in Sind] read with Civil Pro cedure Code (V of 1908;, S. 99‑Frame of suit‑Defect‑‑Two joint purchasers (plaintiffs) executing power of attorney in name of third joint purchaser‑Suit filed through attorney‑‑Seller challenging power of Attorney qua one of joint purchasers‑Held, even if power of attorney faulty, it at most affects frame of suit and such defect cannot result in reversal or modification of decree.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑ S. 13‑Mutuality in contract‑Contract of sale clearly showing names of two purchasers jointly with third purchaser‑Such two purchasers not signing contract but both executing power of attorney in favour of third joint purchaser who signed contract‑Seller (appellant) accepting earnest money and also a further sum of maximum money‑Held, it does not lie in seller's mouth to say that contract lacked mutuality‑Held further, mere absence of their signatures on contract does not render contract void and privity of contract existed between them and seller. Mir Sarwar Jan v. Fakhruddin Muhammad I L R 39 Cal. 232; Abdul Haque v. Muhammad Yahya Khan A I R 1924 Pat. 81; Chetoomal Moolchand v. Shankardas Girdharilal A I R 1929 Sind 83; Amin Agencies Limited v. Haji Moosa Haji Umar P L D 1953 Sind 57; Province of West Pakistan v. Messrs Mistri and Patel Company P L D 1959 Kar. 782 and Muhammad Siddik v. Jurio P L D 1959 Kar. 400 ref. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑
‑ O. III, r. 2 el. (a) [as amended in Sind] read with Civil Pro cedure Code (V of 1908;, S. 99‑Frame of suit‑Defect‑‑Two joint purchasers (plaintiffs) executing power of attorney in name of third joint purchaser‑Suit filed through attorney‑‑Seller challenging power of Attorney qua one of joint purchasers‑Held, even if power of attorney faulty, it at most affects frame of suit and such defect cannot result in reversal or modification of decree. Iqbal Kazi for Appellant. Abdul Matin and K A. Ghani for Respondents. Date of hearing : 7th August, 1979.