Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Civil Appeal No. 63 of 1972, decided on 7th August, 1979.
‑‑‑ S. 13‑Mutuality in contract‑Contract of sale clearly showing names of two purchasers jointly with third purchaser‑Such two purchasers not signing contract but both executing power of attorney in favour of third joint purchaser who signed contract‑Seller (appellant) accepting earnest money and also a further sum of maximum money‑Held, it does not lie in seller's mouth to say that contract lacked mutuality‑Held further, mere absence of their signatures on contract does not render contract void and privity of contract existed between them and seller.
Mir Sarwar Jan v. Fakhruddin Muhammad I L R 39 Cal. 232; Abdul Haque v. Muhammad Yahya Khan A I R 1924 Pat. 81; Chetoomal Moolchand v. Shankardas Girdharilal A I R 1929 Sind 83; Amin Agencies Limited v. Haji Moosa Haji Umar P L D 1953 Sind 57; Province of West Pakistan v. Messrs Mistri and Patel Company P L D 1959 Kar. 782 and Muhammad Siddik v. Jurio P L D 1959 Kar. 400 ref.
----‑ O. III, r. 2 el. (a) [as amended in Sind] read with Civil Pro cedure Code (V of 1908;, S. 99‑Frame of suit‑Defect‑‑Two joint purchasers (plaintiffs) executing power of attorney in name of third joint purchaser‑Suit filed through attorney‑‑Seller challenging power of Attorney qua one of joint purchasers‑Held, even if power of attorney faulty, it at most affects frame of suit and such defect cannot result in reversal or modification of decree.
Iqbal Kazi for Appellant.
Abdul Matin and K A. Ghani for Respondents.
Date of hearing : 7th August, 1979.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer