Mst. AFIFA BIBI alias BEGUM AFIFA MOMDOOT vs Mst — 2022 CLC 1659 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Mst. AFIFA BIBI alias BEGUM AFIFA MOMDOOT VS Mst. JAMEELA SIKANDAR Ss. 8 & 9---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 113---Agreement, acceptance of---Consideration, receiving of---Suit for specific performance--¬-Plaintiff/respondent alleged that she purchased 4 plots (comprising of land measuring 27 Marlas) in Housing Colony/scheme launched by petitioner/defendant and paid Rs.20,000/- as earnest money against receipt on 17-06-1986; that petitioner had to transfer the said suit plots in the name of respondent after approval of the site plan of said Colony/scheme; that in 1997 she came to know that defendant had renamed said colony and was trying to sell the suit plots; that plaintiff was ready to pay the remaining consideration---Petitioner/defendant in written statement denied the execution of any agreement and receipt of consideration and raised objection that suit was time barred---Suit was dismissed by Civil Court---Appeal accepted by District Court with costs---Validity---Definition of "Agreement to sell" required that both the parties to agreement had to make promise for some lawful act against some lawful consideration---Noting in the Contract Act, 1872 required that offer and acceptance must necessarily be in writing or form a single document---Perusal of documents (receipt, Register Haqdaran Zameen and site plans) showed the existence of willing seller/willing buyer, settlement of the bargain, partial payment of consideration as well as the availability of specific property and consensus for the bargain between the parties---Petitioner received the amount of Rs.20,000 as earnest money and issued a duly signed receipt---As per written statement, the respondent was in possession the suit property---Receipt coupled with site plan conveniently lead to hold that valid agreement was executed between the parties on 22-06-1986---Said facts were admitted by attorney/real son of petitioner in his statement as witness---Admitted facts need not be proved---Witness went on saying that after failure of the said colony/scheme, the agreement with the plaintiff was verbally rescinded and amount received as partial consideration was returned to the plaintiff but in this respect no plea/assertion was taken in written statement nor proved through any corroborative evidence---Civil Revision was dismissed and respondent was directed to deposit the remaining consideration amount (Rs.61,000/-) with trial Court.

Mst. AFIFA BIBI alias BEGUM AFIFA MOMDOOT vs Mst — 2022 CLC 1659 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 CLC