Lawyers Directory Listing
Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 38 of 1976, decided on 22nd March, 1981.
(Against judgment and order, dated 18‑3‑1975 of. Lahore High Court in R.S.A. 10lBWP of 1975).
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑
‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.27(b)‑‑Vendee‑ petitioner purchasing land with full knowledge of existence of an agreement to sell land in favour of respondent‑‑Respondent's suit for specific performance, held, rightly decreed‑‑Leave to appeal refused.
Kh. Mushtaq Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Date of hearing: 22nd March, 1981.
This petition is directed against the judgment of the High Court, dated 18‑3‑1975 whereby an R . S . A . filed by the petitioner was dismissed.
2. The facts of the case are briefly that Shah Muhammad agreed to sell the land in dispute to Hasan Bakhsh, predecessor‑in‑interest of respondents Nos. 1 to 6 and received a sum of Rs.800 as earnest money. Later on, he received some more money towards the price of the said land. But thereafter he sold the same land to Abdur Rashid (petitioner; through a Registered Deed. Hasan Bakhsh filed a suit for specific performance of the agreement of sale against Shah Muhammad He also impleaded Abdur Rashid as a defendant in the said suit and challenged the sale of the said land in his favour. The trial Court dismissed the suit.
3. Being aggrieved, Hasan Bakhsh filed an appeal before the District Judge who accepted the same inter alia, on the ground that Abdur Rashid, petitioner, had purchased the land it dispute with full knowledge of agreement of Shah Muhammad to sell this land to Hasan Bakhsh.
4. Abdur Rashid then filed an R.S.A. in the High Court. The main contention urged before the High Court eras that Abdur Rashid did not have any such knowledge and he was, therefore protected by clause (b) of section 27 of the Specific Relief Act. It was also urged that the learned District Judge has not correctly appreciated the evidence and, therefore, came to an incorrect finding of fact as to Abdur Rashid's previous knowledge with respect to agreement of sale of land by Shah Muhammad to Hasan Bakhsh, and pointed out certain discrepancies in the statements of the witnesses in that respect. The learned Judge of the High Court, however, agreed with the District Judge and observed that the discrepancies were not material and the District Judge had rightly ignored them. He also observed that the question being one of fact cannot be opened in appeal.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the same contentions before us. But having gone through the judgment of the learned District Judge we find that the reasons given by him in paragraph No. 8 of his judgment for holding that Abdur Rashid was well aware of the transaction in favour of Hasan Bakhsh, aware unexceptionable. As such we are of the view that the High Court was justified in concurring with the District Judge and in dismissing petitioner's R.S.A. This petition is, therefore, dismissed as being without merit.
M. Y. H. Leave petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer