1989 PLP 177 (CLC)
MUHAMMAD DIN‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD HANIF‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1989 PLP 177 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Mumir J. Sheikh, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD DIN‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD HANIF‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Punjab Pre‑emption Act (I of 1913)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 177 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Punjab Pre‑emption Act (I of 1913)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 177 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Mumir J. Sheikh, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 177 (CLC) (MUHAMMAD DIN‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD HANIF‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Asif Saeed Khan Khosa for Petitioner. A.W. Chaudhry on behalf of Talib H. Rizvi for Respondent
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑0. 25‑‑Compromise of parties with regard to sale price‑‑Orders of Courts below were set aside and decree of Trial Court was modified to the extent of sale price agreed to by the parties‑‑Sale amount as determined by compromise of parties, minus the amount already deposited. in Court by order of Trial Court, was directed to be deposited in Court by a specified date failing which suit of plaintiff would stand dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
Civil Revision No.162/D of 1988, decided on 3rd May, 1988 ‑‑‑0. 25‑‑Compromise of parties with regard to sale price‑‑Orders of Courts below were set aside and decree of Trial Court was modified to the extent of sale price agreed to by the parties‑‑Sale amount as determined by compromise of parties, minus the amount already deposited. in Court by order of Trial Court, was directed to be deposited in Court by a specified date failing which suit of plaintiff would stand dismissed. Asif Saeed Khan Khosa for Petitioner. A.W. Chaudhry on behalf of Talib H. Rizvi for Respondent According to the statements of the parties they have compromised the matter by a lawful agreement. Muhammad Tufail son of Ali Muhammad Lambardar, has taken oath on Holy Qur'an in which he has stated that the sale took place in consideration of Rs.13,
000. In view of the agreement between the parties this revision petition is admitted. Notice.
2. It is also hereby accepted. The orders of the Courts below are hereby set aside and the decree of the trial Court dated 6‑2‑1983 is hereby modified to the extent that the suit of the respondent shall stand decreed against payment of Rs.13,000 as price of the land. _ Out of which Rs.5,000.00 has already been deposited. The remaining amount of Rs.8,000.00 shall be deposited by the respondent within three months from today. In case the said amount of Rs.8,000 in not deposited within time, the suit of the respondent shall stand dismissed. The parties are left to bear their own costs. A . A . / M‑982 / L Order accordingly