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 Petitions Nos. 389 of 1981, and 543 of 1984, decided on 30th April, 1985.
(Against the judgment and order dated 20‑1‑1981 and 18‑4‑1984 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Writ Petition No. 6939 of 1980 and R.S.A. No. 704 of 1980).
‑‑‑Art. 185 (3)‑‑Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 12‑‑High Court giving two apparently inconsistent decisions on different dates between same parties in respect of same property‑‑Leave to appeal granted to examine soundness of these decisions.
Syed Tanseer Asghar, Advocate Supreme Court assisted by Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners (in Civil Petition No. 399 of 1981).
M.A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents Nos. 3 & 4 (in Civil Petition No. 399 of 1981).
Zaki‑ud‑Din Pal, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners (in Civil Petition No. 543 of 1984).
Nemo for Respondents (in Civil Petition No. 543 of 1984).
Date of hearing: 30th April, 1985.
‑Leave to appeal is granted to examine the soundness of two apparently inconsistent decisions of different dates of the Lahore High Court between the same parties in respect of the same property. In one (Regular Second Appeal No. 704 of 1980, decided on 18‑4‑1984) Ghulam Hussain the predecessor‑in‑interest of the respondents (in C. P. 543 of 1984) was for the first time granted a decree for specific performance of an agreement to sell the disputed property against Abdul Wahab the predecessor‑in‑interest of the petitioners. In the other (W.P. 389 of 1981, decided on 20‑1‑1981) the ejectment order against the successors‑in‑interest of the same Ghulam Hussain from a portion of the same property was left intact. The owners objects on various legal grounds to the grant of decree of specific performance by the High Court reversing the concurrent finding of the two Courts in second appeal. The occupants object to the legality of the ejectment order against them, once they are armed with a decree for specific performance of an agreement to sell the same property.
Security Rs.1,000 in each case.
Status quo meanwhile.
M.Y.H. Leave granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer