PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

Syed MUHAMMAD GHOUS vs Mst — 2024 CLC 900 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2024 CLC 900 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2024
Reporter
CLC
Parties
Syed MUHAMMAD GHOUS vs Mst
Subject matter
Civil
Provisions referred to
S. 41; S. 27; S. 12; Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908); Civil Procedure Code

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

Judgment text as reported

Syed MUHAMMAD GHOUS VS Mst. NAJMA S. 41, Proviso---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), S. 27(b)---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 12 (2)---Fraud and misrepresentation---Non-impleadment of a party---Petitioner (who asserted himself as bona fide purchaser) filed an application under S. 12(2) of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (C.P.C), alleging that lady plaintiff (vendee) did not implead him as a necessary party in her suit against defendants/vendors regarding the flat (suit-property) and obtained a decree in her favour by playing fraud and misrepresentation on the Court---Trial Court, after recording evidence , dismissed the said application under S.12(2), C.P.C., which order was maintained by the District Court---Validity---Record revealed that the petitioner entered into a sale agreement with respondents/vendors who was located on the ground floor of the apartments (building) while respondents, at the same time, resided on the fourth floor of the same building---Yet the petitioner did not bother to check in with any of them before entering into a sale agreement---Petitioner took no steps to safeguard his interest, and he now had to live with the consequences of the risk he took---In the said circumstances, the petitioner could neither take benefit of proviso to S.41 of the Transfer of Property act, 1882, nor he was able to establish that he was a bona fide purchaser for valuable consideration without notice under S. 27(b) of the Specific Relief act, 1877---Petitioner/applicant did not act prudently---Petitioner had remedies available to him for the redressal of his grievance, including filing a suit for specific performance, yet he took the path less travelled by attempting to prove his title by filing a S.12(2), C.P.C., application---No illegality or material irregularity had been noticed in the impugned Orders passed by both the Courts below---Constitution petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2024 CLC

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English