PLD 2022 Lahore 372
Balance sale consideration, deposit of---Suit for possession through specific performance---Appellant/plaintiff had allegedly paid earnest money at the time of execution of agreement---Specific notice was assertedly issued to respondents/defendants notifying that balance sale consideration had been arranged---Civil Court granted status quo which was ordered to be maintained subject to payment of remaining sale consideration---Appellant was also directed to affix proper Court fee---Appellant failed to deposit remaining sale consideration----To meet the ends of justice one "absolute" "last opportunity" was being provided to the appellant---Direction to deposit the balance sale consideration, failing which no further opportunity shall be given and "order shall be passed in accordance with law"---Appellant had not deposited the remaining sale consideration nor any plausible reason was brought on record---Suit was consequently dismissed---Validity---[Per Rasaal Hasan Syed J.; Shahid Karim J. dissenting]---Repeated caution and last opportunity given by the Civil Judge to the appellant on non-deposit of the balance sale consideration, were couched in general terms of reiterating that in case of failure to deposit, "an order would be passed in accordance with law"---Such expression could be interpreted to entail the vacation of the status quo order qua alienation granted in favour of appellant----No explicit/ unequivocal warning of dismissal of suit as specific penal consequence of non-deposit of balance sale consideration was recorded by putting appellant on notice nor could anything to that effect be shown by respondents---Dismissing the suit itself on non-deposit of the balance sale consideration did not appear to be readily covered by the phrase "order shall be passed in accordance with law" repeatedly used by the Civil Judge---Suit could not be dismissed on non-deposit unless the Trial Court had specifically directed deposit of remaining sale consideration and put the plaintiff on explicit notice to such effect bearing clear warning that non-deposit of balance sale price should be deemed to be his inability of performing his part of contract---No such clear/unambiguous and pointed warning was ever issued to the appellant in the case as to explicitly notify the appellant of the penal effect of dismissal of suit---Appeal was allowed; undertaking was taken that appellant should deposit the balance sale consideration within 7 days; and appellant was put on notice that in case of failure to deposit the said amount within seven days of the date of appearance immediately, his suit would be deemed to be automatically dismissed.
0 Comments