MUHAMMAD HANIF QURESHI vs MUHAMMAD AYUB Ss — 2024 CLC 1838 ISLAMABAD

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

MUHAMMAD HANIF QURESHI VS MUHAMMAD AYUB Ss. 42, 39 & 54---Suit for declaration, cancellation, recovery, permanent and mandatory injunction---Fraud and professional breach of trust, assertion of---Proof---Claim of the plaintiff was that exchange agreement was executed between the plaintiff and original owner of the suit-plot had entitled him to be its sole owner; that defendant was merely one of the two attesting witnesses of the said agreement, who was unlawfully claiming 50% share in the suit property---Stance of the defendant was that he and plaintiff had jointly purchased the suit property---Suit was dismissed by the Trial Court---Validity---Appellant/plaintiff was seeking to undo the transfer of the 50% share in the suit property in favour of respondent by alleging "professional breach of trust" and "fraud"---Appellant had given no particulars of fraud in the suit---It was only vaguely pleaded that respondent/defendant had mentioned his own residential address as that of the appellant in the records of the C.D.A. during the transfer process--- Although the (exhibited) transfer letter had been addressed to the original owner, but its (letter's) copies had also been dispatched to the appellant and respondent showing their address, which was the same very address which was given by the appellant and respondent as their address in the "declaration of transferee" (exhibited by the defendant) as well as the affidavit/undertaking (exhibited by defendant) sworn by the appellant and respondent---Thus, the appellant could not complain about the transfer letter being sent to an address that the appellant had himself provided in the said (exhibited) documents---Additionally, that was the very same address which had been provided by the original owner in his application form (duly exhibited by the defendant) as the appellant and respondent's address---Appellant being an educated person could not claim to be unaware about the contents of the said documents---No plausible explanation was presented by the appellant as to why the appellant waited for more than four years before instituting the suit for, inter alia, the cancellation of the relevant transfer letter---Claim of the appellant / plaintiff (regarding transfer of the suit property due to alleged exchange agreement) was not sufficient to interfere with the impugned judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court dismissing his suit---Appeal filed by the plaintiff was dismissed, in circumstances.

MUHAMMAD HANIF QURESHI vs MUHAMMAD AYUB Ss — 2024 CLC 1838 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 CLC