2005 PLP 1475 (SCMR)
SHER MUHAMMAD through L.Rs, and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD RAFIQ through L.Rs. and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2005 PLP 1475 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Tanvir Ahmed Khan and Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday, JJ |
| Parties | SHER MUHAMMAD through L.Rs, and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD RAFIQ through L.Rs. and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Specific Relief Act (I of 1877) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 1475 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Specific Relief Act (I of 1877) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 1475 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Tanvir Ahmed Khan and Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1475 (SCMR) (SHER MUHAMMAD through L.Rs, and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD RAFIQ through L.Rs. and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Dr. A. Basit, Advocate Supreme Court with Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Aftab Iqbal Chaudhry, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanvir Ahmed, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 7th April, 2003.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 12-11-1999 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Civil Revision No.7-D of 1986).
S. 12
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)-Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell
Dismissal of suit by Courts below was upheld by High Court in revision
Question of fact that defendant was bona fide purchaser of suit-land for consideration had been determined by two Courts below and upheld by High Court
Impugned judgment did not suffer from any illegality or legal infirmity warranting interference
Supreme Court dismissed petition and refused leave to appeal.
Judgment & Decree
TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.
Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment, dated 12-11-1999 whereby a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dismissed Civil Revision No.7-D of 1986 filed by the petitioners maintaining the earlier determinations of the two Courts below. Facts briefly are that the petitioners filed a suit for specific performance on the basis of an agreement, dated 24-8-1974 whereby the respondent Muhammad Rafiq agreed to sell the disputed land for a consideration of Rs.10,
500. A sum of Rs.1,500 was paid as advance. Thereafter another amount of Rs.3,000 was subsequently paid through another agreement, dated 23-1-1975. An exception was also taken to the sale-deed dated 23-5-1975. The suit was resisted by the respondent. Issues were framed and the parties led their evidence. The learned Civil Judge, Nankana Sahib, through his judgment, dated 23-9-1980 dismissed the suit. Appeal filed by the petitioners was accepted by the learned Additional District Judge, Sheikhupura, through his judgment, dated 1-8-1981 and the suit was remanded to the trial Court for deciding the same afresh on certain issues after affording opportunity to the parties to lead evidence. After remand additional evidence was recorded by the trial Court and the suit was dismissed vide its judgment, dated 11-12-1984. The petitioners filed an appeal assailing the above judgment, which too was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sheikhupura, vide his judgment, dated 1-4-1985 who held that the determination of the trial Court that the petitioners were not entitled to get a decree for specific performance of contract was unexceptionable. The petitioners filed aforesaid civil revision before the Lahore High Court, Lahore, which also met the same fate as it was dismissed by a learned Single Judge through his judgment, dated 12-11-1999, impugned herein. Hence, this petition for leave to appeal. We have considered the contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire documents appended with this petition. A question of fact that the respondents were bona fide purchasers of the land in dispute for consideration had been determined by the two Courts below, which determination has been upheld by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court by advancing cogent reasons. Learned counsel for the petitioners has failed to point out any illegality or legal infirmity in the impugned judgments warranting interference by this Court. Resultantly, for what has been stated above, the present petition being devoid of any merit is hereby dismissed and leave refused. S.A.K./S-288/S Leave refused. ***