2024 CLC 1379
Subsequent vendee , responsibilities of --- A subsequent vendee is required to make inquiry as to the nature of possession or title or further interest if any of original purchaser over the suit- property at time of entering into sale transaction .
MUHAMMAD TANVIR versus MUHAMMAD RAMZAN ASAD and others ---
Civil Revision No. 19654 of 2022
2024 CLC 1379
Suit for specific performance -- Discretion / power of the Trial Court --- Scope -- Under S.22 of the Specific Relief Act , 1877 , the grant of decree for specific performance comes within the sole discretionary power of the court which can refuse to grant the relief on the principle of equity even if the person filing the suit has proved the case .
MUHAMMAD TANVIR versus MUHAMMAD RAMZAN ASAD and others ---
Civil Revision No. 19654 of 2022
2024 CLC 1379
Suit for specific performance and cancellation of mutation --- Execution of agreement to sell , denial of --- Agreement to sell prior in time --- Burden of proof- Initial burden was on the respondent / plaintiff to prove the factum that he had no knowledge of prior agreement in favour of the petitioner / defendant , whereas in his cross - examination he admitted that he knew the same ; thus , he was not entitled for any relief .
Civil Revision No. 19654 of 2022
2024 CLC 1379
MUHAMMAD TANVIR versus MUHAMMAD RAMZAN ASAD and others ---
Civil Revision No. 19654 of 2022
2024 CLC 1379
Suit for specific performance and cancellation of mutation --- Execution of agreement to sell , denial of --- Agreement to sell prior in time --- Scope and effect --- Appellate Court decreed the suit of the plaintiff , while setting aside judgment of Trial Court whereby it ordered the defendant to return double amount of earnest money to the plaintiff --- Contention of the petitioner / defendant was that the owner of suit land ( vendor / respondent / defendant ) had conceded his ( petitioner's ) claim ( prior agreement to sell ) as well as relevant mutation having been entered in his favour whereas said owner ( as a defendant in suit - in - question ) had denied the execution of agreement to sell in favour of respondent / plaintiff --- Validity --- Evidence produced by the respondent / plaintiff revealed that one of the witnesses produced by him , during cross - examination , deposed that the mutation ( sought to be cancelled ) was already entered in respect of the petitioner and admitted it correct
that suit - property had been transferred by owner in his ( petitioner's ) favour - Even , the respondent / plaintiff while appearing as witnesses admitted that prior to him , the petitioner / defendant had purchased the suit land from the real owner of the suit land ( respondent / defendant ) and it showed that the respondent / plaintiff knew the execution of * agreement to sell by respondent / owner in favour of the petitioner --- Where an agreement is admitted , possession is delivered and receipt of major portion of payment is also admitted then any subsequent agreement or even registered document , if any , cannot be considered as a superior document to that of the earlier agreement --- Furthermore , under Proviso ( 1 ) & ( 2 ) to S. 50 of the Registration Act , 1908 , if an unregistered document is prior in time that would be entitled to the rights under Section 53 - A of the Transfer of Property Act , 1882 --- High Court set aside the judgment and decree passed by the Appellate Court and the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court was upheld --- Civil revision filed by the defendant was allowed .
0 Comments