BAHADUR KHAN vs KARIM GUL arts — 2022 PLD 51 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

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

BAHADUR KHAN VS KARIM GUL arts. 17 & 79---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. VI, R. 2---Respondent filed suit for declaration/specific performance claiming that he purchased property from another respondent for certain consideration; that out of said property some portion was owned by yet another respondent and a bigger portion was in the name of petitioner; that petitioner had given power of attorney for sale of his respective share; that he had paid major part of consideration amount and remaining consideration was to be paid at the time of mutation---Suit was concurrently decreed---Petitioner contended that plaintiff allegedly purchased the suit property form petitioner through his attorney but no such power of attorney was produced to substantiate his claim that he acted as agent of the petitioner; that whole suit was based on alleged agreement which had not been produced; that suit had been decided on oral evidence which was beyond the pleadings---Contention was that sale of the suit property had not been denied by attorney---Validity---Petitioner had specifically denied the contention of plaintiff (in his written statement) that neither he/his sons sold out their land to anyone nor gave authority to sell out their land and Trial Court had framed specific issue in respect of such controversy---Plaintiff's witnesses had deposed the facts beyond the pleadings; none of the witnesses attested the impugned agreement---Plaintiff stated (in evidence) that petitioner verbally sold suit property to him while in his plaint asserted that the same was purchased by him through attorney of the petitioner---Evidence of the plaintiff was not consistent with his averments in plaint---agreement was denied by the petitioner and neither such agreement was produced on record nor marginal witnesses thereof were produced---Both essential documentary evidence (i.e. agreement to sell and power of attorney) had not been produced by plaintiff to substantiate his case---Findings of appellate Court suffered from material irregularity/illegality/mis-construction of law---Revision petition was allowed; impugned judgments/decrees were set aside; and suit was dismissed, in circumstances.

BAHADUR KHAN vs KARIM GUL arts — 2022 PLD 51 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 PLD