MUHAMMAD ISLAM vs BAGH ALI arts — 2025 CLC 1291 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

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

MUHAMMAD ISLAM VS BAGH ALI arts. 17, 79 & 81---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), S. 12---Suit for specific performance of agreement---agreement to sell---Proof---admission by the executant---Effect---Second marginal witness of agreement, non-producing of---Effect---Suit of the plaintiff (respondent / vendee) was concurrently decreed on the basis that execution of agreement-to-sell was admitted by the defendant (appellant / vendor) in a prior suit---Validity---For the purposes of proof of a document falling under the purview of art. 17 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 ('the Order 1984'), two attesting witnesses must be examined as per requirement of art. 79 of the Order, 1984---However, the rigors and clutches of the said requirement envisaged under art. 17 read with art. 79 of the Order 1984 subside where the execution of a document is admitted---In such a situation, the plaintiff is not bound to produce both the marginal witnesses in order to prove the execution of the agreement---Though, the documents were required to be attested by two witnesses but where the executant admits the execution of the document, then in terms of art. 81 of the Order, 1984 such document can be used against him though it was required by law to be attested---article 81 of the Order, 1984 is an exception to the general rule that where a document is required by law to be attested, the same cannot be used in evidence unless two attesting witnesses are called for the purposes of proving its execution---as the agreement in the present case had been admitted in the prior suit filed by the respondent against the appellant, by recording statement before the Trial Court (statement-in-question), the non-production of both the marginal witnesses was not fatal to the case of the respondent---Thus, the suit for specific performance of the contract based on an agreement to sell can be decreed even if the second marginal witnesses of the agreement is not produced by the vendee in compliance of art. 79 of the Order, 1984 in cases which fall within the purview of art. 81 which is an exception to the rule contained under art. 79 of the Order, 1984---Both the Courts below had correctly appreciated the controversy while decreeing the suit of the respondent---Regular second appeal, being merit-less, was dismissed.

MUHAMMAD ISLAM vs BAGH ALI arts — 2025 CLC 1291 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC