Suit for specific performance---Oral agreement to sell immovable property---Proof---Plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of an oral agreement to sell immovable property

The petitioner’s foremost contention is that undeniably the stand of the respondents was based on oral agreement to sell whereas, the particulars of oral agreement to sell have not been explained in the alleged Iqrar Nama, which was sine qua non for getting a decree in a case of specific performance. Reliance is placed on Muhammad Nawaz through L.Rs. vs. Haji Muhammad Baran Khan through L.Rs. (2013 SCMR 1300), relevant portion whereof is reproduced hereunder:-

“Suit for specific performance---Oral agreement to sell immovable property---Proof---Plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of an oral agreement to sell immovable property---Trial Court decreed the suit in favour of plaintiff---High Court set aside judgment and decree of Trial Court---Validity---Perusal of plaint showed that plaintiff had neither mentioned date of striking of bargain nor witnesses in whose presence the oral agreement to sell was arrived at were mentioned-- -No period was fixed for completion of oral agreement to sell and such fact did not find mention in the plaint-- -Names of alleged marginal witnesses of the oral agreement were not incorporated in the plaint----.”

 The second limb of his argument is that no one can be allowed to prove his case beyond the scope of pleadings as enunciated by the honourable Supreme Court in a case reported as Muhammad Wali Khan and another vs. Gul Sarwar Khan and another (PLD 2010 Supreme Court 965). In another case cited as Mubarak Ali and others vs. Khushi Muhammad and others (PLD 2011 Supreme Court 155) it has been held that no one can be allowed to plead and seek relief from the Courts on a plea not founded and embedded in his pleadings. In sequel to the said case law, the judgment reported as Combind Investment (Pvt.) Ltd. vs.Wali Bhai and others (PLD 2016 Supreme Court 730) is also referred, which pronounces that none of the parties to a judicial proceeding can be allowed to adduce evidence in support of a contention not pleaded by it and the decision of a case cannot rest on such evidence. 

 Part of Judgment 

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE. JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT.

Civil Revision
2742-10

2017 LHC 4763