Relevancy

2025 CLC 513 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S. 12Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), S. 54Suit for specific performance of contract for immovable propertyCut-off date for payment of balance sale considerationConduct of the vendee for issuance of decree of specific performanceRelevancy

Failure of respondent/plaintiff to deposit the remaining sale consideration throughout the proceedings showing his lack of readiness and willingness to perform his contractual obligation

Plea of pending proceedings before the National Accountability Bureau (NAB)

Unexplained delay in filing the suit

Effect

Conditional offer made by the petitioner/defendant during pendency of suit before Trial Court, became invalid owing to non-fulfillment by the respondent

Appellate Court treating that offer as admission of the defendant and accepted the appeal of the respondent

Validity

Respondent entered into the agreement with the petitioner and thereafter, entangled the latter into litigation and avoided the payment of the balance consideration amount on one pretext or the other, meaning thereby that the respondent was neither willing nor ready to pay the balance amount of consideration and the Appellate Court below was not justified in relying on the admission of execution of the agreement by the petitioner before the Trial Court to decree the suit of the respondent

In fact, when the direction of the Trial Court was not complied with by the respondent, the Trial Court should have immediately proceeded to dismiss the suit

Conditional offer made by the petitioner before the Trial Court to decree the suit for specific performance of the contract, which was not accepted by the respondent did not remain valid at the appellate stage, thus, it was unjustified to pass the judgment and decree on the basis of an offer which no longer existed in favour of respondent, who had acted in a contumacious manner

Performance of the contract should not have been seen from the date when it was suitable to the respondent

To adjudge whether the respondent was ready and willing to perform his part of the contract, the court had to take into consideration the conduct of the respondent prior as well as subsequent to the institution of the suit along with other attending circumstances

Amount of consideration which respondent had to pay to the petitioner must necessarily be proved to be available and right from the cut-off date set for completion of the contract till date of the decree, the respondent must prove that he was ready and had always been willing to perform his part of the contract

Conduct of the respondent had been far from fair and he had failed to make out a case for the grant of any equitable relief since his conduct amply showed that he was not ready and willing to perform his part of the contract: neither when the suit was instituted; nor when the interim injunction was granted; nor throughout the proceedings before the Trial Court, and only deposited the amount, at the appellate stage, when it suited him

There was no explanation in the suit as to why the respondent remained mum for a period of almost one year after the cut-off-date and never acted promptly to institute the suit

Civil revision was allowed, in circumstances with a direction to return the earnest money already received by the petitioner.

2021 PLD 550 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

S. 376Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 4(2)(a) & 14(1)RapeSexual history/character of rape victimRelevancy"Two-finger test" (TFT) or "virginity test"Constitutionality and legality

In rape cases sexual history/character of rape victim was not relevant and it could not be used to discredit the victim's credibility

Furthermore the two-finger test" (TFT) or "virginity test" had no scientific justification or evidentiary relevance to determine the commission of the sexual assault of rape

Reporting sexual history of a rape survivor amounted to discrediting her independence, identity, autonomy and free choice thereby degrading her human worth and offending her right to dignity guaranteed under Art. 14 of the Constitution

Principles relating to relevance of sexual history of rape victim and constitutionality of two-finger test" (TFT) or "virginity test" stated.

2021 CLC 1880 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

Arts. 55 & 56Judgment/findings of another CourtRelevancy

Trial court could not use the judgment/findings of another court that did not fall within the scope of S.55 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 as a substitute for its own findings of fact backed by the evidence adduced before it

Court acting under the influence of a judgment rendered by another court in relation to a claim of the respondents' property in another village was a breach of S.56 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984.

2014 PCrLJ 1355 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT Judicial Precedent

S. 497(5)Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 365-B, 376 & 34Bail, recalling ofCase of abduction and rapeDelay in lodging of F.I.R.RelevancyF.I.R. in such cases were lodged at the risk and cost of family honour and future of the victim

Pre-arrest bail was recalled accordingly despite delay in lodging of F.I.R.

2014 PCrLJ 396 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Ss. 497 & 173BailInvestigations qua participation of accused in the offenceDivergent opinionsRelevancyAccused initially declared as innocent by investigating officerSubsequent investigation finding accused involved in the offenceEffect

Such divergent opinions of investigating officers about alleged participation of accused in the offence were relevant for consideration for bail plea of accused.

2009 YLR 795 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

Ss. 497/498BailPolice opinionRelevancy

Ipsi dixit of police though is not binding on the Court, yet it can be considered as one of the relevant factors for grant of bail

Benefit of doubt can be extended even at bail stage.