Home Maxims & Terms Essential pre-requisites meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Essential pre-requisites

Essential pre-requisites legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

2022 PLD 395 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
GiftEssential pre-requisites

Donor should be compos mentis, meaning thereby a person who is of sound mind and has the mental capacity to understand the legal implications of his act of making gift and he must be major and the owner of the property which is intended to be gifted; the thing gifted should be in existence at the time of hiba; the thing gifted should be such that its benefit should be lawful under the Shariat; the donor must be free from any coercion/duress or undue influence while making a gift; the thing gifted should come in the possession of the donee himself or through his representative/guardian for an effective hiba.

2022 PLD 395 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
GiftEssential pre-requisites

For a valid gift it is obligatory that the donor divests and dissociates himself downrightly from the dominion and ownership over the property of gift and puts into words his categorical intention to convey the ownership to the donee distinctly and unambiguously with delivery of possession of the property and ensure that donee has secured physical ascendency over the property in order to constitute the delivery of possession.

2017 SCMR 81 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent
S. 41Transfer by ostensible ownerBona fide purchaser, principle ofEssential pre-requisites

Principle of bona fide purchaser as enunciated by S. 41 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 was founded upon the principles of equity

Essential ingredients of the said principle were that the transferor was the ostensible owner; that the transfer was made by express or implied consent of the real owner; that the transfer was made for consideration; and that the transferee while acting in good faith had taken reasonable care before entering into such transaction

Said four essential ingredients must co-exist in order for a person to take the benefit of the equitable principle of bona fide purchaser.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Essential pre-requisites", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124958583

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Essential pre-requisites"

PLC N 2018
Writ Petition No.3593 of 2016, decided on 11th June, 2018.

2018 P L C Note 30

MATEE UL HASSAN Versus NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION APPELLATE BENCH AT ISLAMABAD and 4 others

Court: Islamabad High Court
MLD 2019
2018-August-28

2019 M L D 107

Messrs WAHID BUILDERS AND TECHNO TIME CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PRIVATE LTD. through Attorney and 4 others — Petitioners Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary SAFRON, Pak Secretariat,

Court: Peshawar
CLC 2018
2017-September-29

2018 C L C 1354

SARDAR HUSSAIN and others — Appellants Versus ZAFAR HUSSAIN — Respondent

Court: Peshawar (Mingora Bench)
CLD 2013
2012-November-26

2013 C L D 522

FARMERS' EQUITY PRIVATE LIMITED (FEP) through Chief Executive and 3 others — Appellants Versus MEHBOOB ALAM — Respondent

Court: Lahore
MLD 2019
2018-September-10

2019 M L D 76

HASNAIN OBAID — Petitioner Versus ASIF SHAKOOR and another — Respondents

Court: Peshawar
PLD 2011
2011-May-26

P L D 2011 Peshawar 228

MUHAMMAD SHABBIR — Petitioner Versus SUB-REGISTRAR, PESHAWAR DISTRICT COURT, PESHAWAR and 3 others — Respondents

Court: High Court
PCRLJN 2017
2016-May-16

2017 P Cr

MUHAMMAD IQBAL and 5 others — Petitioners Versus The STATE and others — Respondents

Court: Peshawar (Abbottabad Bench)
PLC(CS) 1997
Civil Petition No. 1704‑L of 1996, decided on 11th February, 1997

1997 P L C (C

SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, LAHORE Versus Mrs. KISHWAR ASLAM and others

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan
PLD 1997
Civil Petition No. 1704‑L of 1996, decided on 11th February, 1997.

P L D 1997 Supreme Court 578

SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, LAHORE‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Mrs. KISHWAR ASLAM and others‑‑‑Respondents

Court:
PLD 1961
Criminal Revision No. 969 of 1959, decided on 23rd November 1959.

P L D (W

ABDUS SALAM‑Petitioner Versus Kh. MEHDI ANWAR‑Respondent

Court: (b) Maxim‑Actio personalis moritur cum persona (personal actions die with the person)‑‑Does not apply in case of death of complainant in non‑cognizable case‑Complaint may be proceeded with by substituted complainant‑Muhammad Azam v. Emperor A I R 1926 Bom. 178 and Panchu Swain v. Emperor A I R 1943 Pat. 379 ref.