ABDUL SAMI KEHAR vs AMANULLAH DASTI S — 2025 CLC 1083 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.

ABDUL SAMI KEHAR VS AMANULLAH DASTI S. 12---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XIX, R.1---Suit for specific performance---Oral agreement to sell---Proof---Failure of the applicant to give essential details in the plaint---Absence of receipts/written evidence as to payment of earnest money---Lack of critical explanation by supporting evidence for the purported relationship between the parties, which prompted the applicant not to reduce the agreement into writing---Identical affidavit in evidence---Admissibility---Discrepancies in the statements of prosecution witnesses---Suit and appeal of the applicant were dismissed concurrently---Validity---Only through rigorous and detailed presentation of evidence the court could be persuaded to issue a decree for specific performance based on an oral agreement to sell---Legal threshold for proving an oral agreement was inherently high due to the absence of written documentation, thus necessitating a robust and meticulous evidentiary approach to satisfy judicial scrutiny---Failure to specify essential details, the absence of written evidence of earnest money, and the lack of a credible explanation or supporting evidence for the purported relationship between the parties all cast significant doubt on the validity of the plaintiff's claim---Both marginal witnesses submitted nearly identical affidavits-in-evidence and such uniformity can sometimes call into question the individuality and spontaneity of their testimonies, as overly similar affidavits suggest coordination rather than independent recounting of the events---While consistency is a crucial element in legal testimonies, the absence of distinct details from each witness can significantly impact the perceived authenticity and reliability of their evidence, thus, it was imperative for each witness to provide testimony based on their personal observations and experiences to bolster the overall credibility of the case---Discrepancies in the details provided during cross-examination highlighted significant contradictions in the witnesses' testimonies, undermining the credibility of the plaintiff's claim and raising questions about the reliability of the evidence presented---Civil revision was dismissed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 CLC 1083 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ABDUL SAMI KEHAR VS AMANULLAH DASTI S. 115---Concurrent findings of facts---Interference by High Court in its revisional jurisdiction---Scope---Neither any illegality nor material irregularity was found in the impugned judgments and decrees passed by the lower courts, nor any jurisdictional defects had been identified in the concurrent findings of fact, thus, there was no basis for High Court to exercise its revisional jurisdiction in the absence of any illegality or jurisdictional error---Petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

ABDUL SAMI KEHAR vs AMANULLAH DASTI S — 2025 CLC 1083 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC