USUF PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD. vs MUHAMMAD SABIR CHIPPA S — 2024 CLC 1279 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

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

USUF PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD. VS MUHAMMAD SABIR CHIPPA S.54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XXXIX, Rr. 1 & 2---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), S. 12---Suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell---Balance consideration amount, non-payment / depositing of---appellant (plaintiff / vendee) assailed order passed by the Civil Court whereby stay having been granted in favor of the appellant/ plaintiff had been vacated by dismissing the application under O. XXXIX of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908---Validity---Record revealed that the sale agreement was made between parties on 03.01.2016 who agreed on the sale consideration of Rs.22,500,000/- and at the time of signing the agreement, the vendor had received 10% part payment of the total sale consideration---as per relevant clause of the said agreement, the remaining amount of Rs.20,250,000/- was required to be paid by the vendee to the vendor on or before 13.01.2016 with the grace period of 30 days, and as per the record, the appellant failed to pay the balance sale consideration to the respondent within time as required in the sale agreement---Primarily, the issue involved in the proceedings was simple for the reason that agreement to sell comprises of reciprocal promises and corresponding obligations to be performed in the manner provided for---Vendee cannot seek enforcement of reciprocal obligation on the part of the vendor to execute the sale deed unless he demonstrates that he not only has the financial capacity but he was and is also always willing and ready to meet the same---Promisor/vendor need not perform his part of the promise or obligation to execute conveyance, unless the promisor/respondent (the vendee) is ready and willing to perform his reciprocal promise---It is mandatory for such party that on first appearance before the court or on the date of institution of the suit, it shall apply to the Court for permission to deposit the balance amount---any omission in such regard would entail the dismissal of the suit or decretal of the suit if it was filed by the other side---In the present case, obligation was not fulfilled by the appellant / plaintiff---If a buyer does not fulfill his primary obligation to secure/tender the sale consideration and files suit and does so without depositing the sale consideration in court at the first opportunity, the buyer is placed in an advantageous position---Without prejudice to the rights of parties in pending litigation, High/appellate Court did not find any illegality in the impugned order of dismissal of stay application---appeal filed by the plaintiff was dismissed, in circumstances.

USUF PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD. vs MUHAMMAD SABIR CHIPPA S — 2024 CLC 1279 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 CLC