Subsequent purchaser was required to probe into the matter with regard to possession of the appellant over the suit land and non-production of any evidence and independent witness would not absolve the subsequent purchaser from the onus to discharge that he was having no knowledge of prior agreement to sell in favour of the appellant when appellant was in possession of the suit land-

 2021 SCMR 1797

Suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell immoveable property--- Subsequent purchaser---Bonda fide purchaser--Scope---Knowledge of agreement to sell---Question as to whether the subsequent purchaser had no knowledge of agreement to sell in favour of theappellant/plaintiff when admittedly the appellant was in possession of the suit properly at the time of purchase of the suit property by the subsequent purchaser--Held, that subsequent purchaser was required to probe into the matter with regard to possession of the appellant over the suit land and non-production of any evidence and independent witness would not absolve the subsequent purchaser from the onus to discharge that he was having no knowledge of prior agreement to sell in favour of the appellant when appellant was in possession of the suit land---Statement of subsequent purchaser that he had strained relations with his brother-in-law who admittedly appeared in a previous litigation in a suit filed by the original owner against the appellant was clear knowledge of agreement to sell in favour of the appellant- Furthermore subse uent purchaser opted not to produce the sale deed in his favour on th. hasis of which he was claiming the transfer of suit property in his fave ir--Subsequent purchaser failed to prove that he was having no knowledge of the agreement and he purchased the suit property in good faith; this clearly established that subsequent purchaser was not a bona fide purchaser--