MUBASHAR ALI vs TAHIR ISLAM Ss — 2026 PLD 328 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.

MUBASHAR ALI VS TAHIR ISLAM Ss.9 &10---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S.4---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S.12---Specific performance decree---Conditional decree requiring deposit of balance sale consideration within "two months"---Deposit in bank/treasury---Treasury/bank refusing to accept deposit during court hours---Legality---Treasury/bank deemed closed for that day---Scope---Act may be done on the next opening day---Default clause (deemed dismissal/forfeiture) attracted only upon expiry of lawful computation of the deposit period---Where the day falls on closed/non-banking days, performance shifts to the next working day---Deposit to be treated within time---Facts:---On 03.09.2018, respondent No.1's suit for specific performance was decreed by the appellate court, subject to deposit of the balance sale consideration of Rs. 35,19,000/- within two months, failing which the suit would stand dismissed and earnest money forfeited; respondent No.1 deposited the amount on 05.11.2018, the executing court upheld an objection and treated the deposit as delayed by four days, but appeal was allowed, hence, the present revision petition. Issue: "Whether the deposit made on 05.11.2018 was within the time stipulated in the decree (after excluding the day of decree and accounting for closed/ non-banking days), or whether the executing court had become functus officio and the decree stood dismissed for non-deposit within time?"---Held: The term month employed in contracts denoted a period terminating with the day of succeeding month numerically, corresponding to the day of its beginning, less one---Section 9 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 provided that it would be sufficient for the purpose of excluding the first in a series of days or any other period of time, to use the word 'from', and, for the purpose of including the last in aseries of days or any other period of time, to use the word 'to'---The Limitation Act, 1908 also permitted that for the purpose of instituting appeal or application, the day on which the judgment complained of was pronounced was to be excluded---Thus, in the present case the day of decree i.e. 03.09.2018 was required to be excluded---Date 03.11.2018 was Saturday and 04.11.2018 was Sunday---BPRD Circular No. 08 of 2018 dated 16.05.2018issued by the State Bank of Pakistan was also produced, which reflected working days for deposit in the concerned bank account were from Monday to Friday---View adopted by the appellate court was correct and justified---Court became functus officio only once the period allowed for deposit was over---Present civil revision petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

MUBASHAR ALI vs TAHIR ISLAM Ss — 2026 PLD 328 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PLD