1990 PLP 691 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH (deceased) and others — Petitioners Versus MUMTAZ BEGUM and 5 others — Respondents
| Citation | 1990 PLP 691 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid lqbal, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH (deceased) and others — Petitioners Versus MUMTAZ BEGUM and 5 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Specific Relief Act (I of 1877) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 691 (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 1990 PLP 691 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid lqbal, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 691 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH (deceased) and others — Petitioners Versus MUMTAZ BEGUM and 5 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Khurshid Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
- Ch. Mushtaq Ahmad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Abul Aasim Jafri, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent No.1.
- Date of hearing: 4th June, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order of the Lahore High Court dated 27-4-1985 in Civil Revision No.1263-D of 1981).
Ss.42 & 27(b)
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Leave to appeal granted to consider questions whether case was fit for interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction of High Court particularly when two Courts below had rendered findings in favour of the petitioners; what was the effect of decisions of Supreme Court in Mst. Khair-ul Nisa and 6 others v. Malik Muhammad Ishaque and 2 others P L D 1972 S C 25 and Ghulam Nabi and others v. Seth Muhammad Yaqub and others P L D 1983 S C 344; keeping in view provisions of S.27(b), Specific Relief Act, 1877 whether it was not necessary for the Courts below, to apply the principles of Islamic Law which required that the vendors should disclose any defect in title or property to the vendees at the time of sale; if the said principle was held applicable what would be its effect on the plea of respondents/second vendees, regarding their bona fides and lack of notice and all other related questions. Mst. Khair-ul-Nisa and 6 others v. Malik Muhammad Ishaque and 2 others P L D 1972 S C 25 and Ghulam Nabi and others v. Seth Muhammad Yaqub and others P L D 1983 S C 344 ref. Nemo for other Respondents.
Judgment & Decree
Nemo for other Respondents. Date of hearing: 4th June, 1989. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought by the plaintiffs side in a suit for specific performance; against the acceptance by the High Court, of respondents/defendants Civil Revision. After hearing both the learned counsel we consider it a fit case for examination of the following questions:- (a) Whether the case was fit for interference in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction of the High Court; particularly when the learned two Courts below had rendered findings in favour of the petitioners. (b) What is the effect on this case of Mst. Khair-ul-Nisa and 6 others v. Malik Muhammad Ishaque and 2 others (P L D 1972 S C 25) cited by the learned counsel for the respondent/caveator and Ghulam Nabi and others v. Seth Muhammad Yaqub and others (P L D 1983 S C 344) cited by the learned counsel for the petitioners. (c) Keeping in view the provisions of section 27 (b) Specific Relief Act A whether it was not necessary for the learned Courts below in this case of specific performance to apply the principles of Islamic Law which required that the vendors/respondents should disclose any defect in title or property to the vendees (in this case the second vendees/ respondents) at the time of the second sale. (d) If the said principle is held applicable what will be its effect on the plea of the respondents/second vendees regarding their bona fides and lack of notice. (e) And all other related questions. Leave to appeal accordingly is granted. Security Rs.5,
000. The appeal shall be prepared on the present record with direction to file all essential documents. M.A.K./M-1030/S Leave granted,