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

Zahid Mahmood vs Sabir Hussain arts — 2025 MLD 271 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2025 MLD 271 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2025
Reporter
MLD
Parties
Zahid Mahmood vs Sabir Hussain arts
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 12

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

Zahid Mahmood VS Sabir Hussain arts. 17 & 79 --- Specific Relief act ( I of 1877 ), S. 12 --- Suit for specific performance --- agreement-to-sell --- Execution --- Proof --- Comparison of signatures --- Scope and effect --- assertion of the plaintiffs/petitioners was that transaction of sale was settled with the defendant / respondent and agreement and receipt were scribed, yet said stance was strongly controverted by the latter while raising serious allegations with regard to its genuineness as well as transaction detailed therein--- Plaintiffs were concurrently non-suited --- Contention of the petitioners / plaintiffs was that as per desire of the very defendant /respondent, his signatures over alleged agreement and receipt were compared with through an expert, thus no further proof was required to establish their construction as well as veracity--- Validity ---Record revealed that though the disputed documents were referred to the Forensic Lab for comparison, which after some drill-work submitted positive Report, but admittedly its maker was not called for to prove the same, which per se was not admissible and was rightly ignored from being taken into consideration by the fora below---Moreover, it is always risky to base the findings of genuineness of writing or signature on expert's opinion, because such like report cannot be taken as conclusive proof--- Even otherwise, a document not part of judicial record can only be proved by examining direct affirmative evidence and any secondary or other mode cannot be taken as a substitute to the former mode of proof, thus the alleged report was of no help to the petitioners--- No material irregularity/illegality as well as jurisdictional defect or mis-reading of evidence was found in the impugned judgments of two Courts below ;thus , no case of interference was made out --- Revision filed by plaintiffs , being merit-less, was dismissed in limine.

Other judgments reported in 2025 MLD

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