Raza Khan vs Malik Muhammad Munir O — 2025 MLD 1201 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.

Raza Khan VS Malik Muhammad Munir O.XVII, Rr.1(1) & 3 ---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), S.12---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell---Non-production of evidence despite several opportunities ---Dismissal of a suit for want of evidence ---Trend of granting 'last opportunity' then 'absolute last opportunity' deprecated by courts---Respondent No.1 (vendor) entered into an agreement to sell with the appellant (vendee)---Upon the vendor's refusal to execute the sale deed, the appellant filed a suit for specific performance---Despite numerous opportunities (thirty five in total; including five last and final opportunities), the appellant/vendee failed to produce complete evidence---The Trial Court dismissed the suit under O.XVII, R. 3, C.P.C. for want of evidence---The sole point for determination before the High Court was as to "whether the trial court rightly invoked the provision under O.XVII, R. 3 of C.P.C. to dismiss the suit for specific performance on account of the appellant's repeated failure to produce evidence despite being granted multiple opportunities, including final warnings"---Held: The record showed that the appellant/vendee was afforded with five last and final opportunities for production of his evidence and the adjournment was granted with costs and warning as to application of penal provision under O.XVII, R.3, CPC but even then the appellant/vendee failed to avail the same, which showed his adamant attitude towards the orders of the Trial Court---Trial Court used the discretion in favour of the appellant/vendee many a time by granting him adjournments for production of complete evidence but he failed to catch up to the said leniency shown to him by the Trial Court and even he himself did not jump into the witness box so as to record his statement---Such attitude of the appellant/vendee made it crystal clear as to how he had pursued his case and also showed his disobedience and indifferent demeanor towards the orders of the court; thus, such like indolent person could not seek favour of law, because law favours the vigilant and not the indolent---The impugned order, judgment and decree were passed with jurisdiction and were well within the parameters of law and the same were not interfered with by the High Court in exercise of appellate jurisdiction under S.96 of C.P.C---appeal being meritless, was dismissed, in circumstances.

Raza Khan vs Malik Muhammad Munir O — 2025 MLD 1201 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 MLD