C.P.L.A.174-K/2022
The law regarding oral agreements is clear; all terms and conditions agreed upon orally between the parties must be explicitly stated in detail in the pleadings and substantiated with strong and independent evidence.
It is a settled principle of law that a contract is an agreement having a lawful object, entered into voluntarily by two or more parties each of whom intends to create one or more legal obligations between them. The basic requirements of a valid and enforceable contract are offer, acceptance, exchange of consideration and mutuality of obligations. Further, a fundamentally important ingredient of a valid contract is that it should be between the parties who are competent to contract. An oral agreement by which the parties intended to be bound is valid and enforceable; however, it requires to be proved through clearest and most satisfactory evidence.
It is a well-established legal principle that when a party seeks a decree of specific performance for the sale of immovable property based solely on an oral agreement, the onus is on that party to demonstrate that there was a mutual agreement and consensus between both parties regarding the terms of the oral contract.
A party claiming the existence of an oral agreement must clearly specify the date, time, place, and names of witnesses in their pleadings, such as the plaint or written statement. These requirements are sine qua non to prove an oral agreement to sell which have been settled by this Court in various decisions.
Thus, the law relating to oral agreement is quite clear, the terms and conditions which were orally agreed have to be stated in detail in the pleadings and have to be established through independent evidence which is neither the case of the petitioner nor was it so set up before the lower fora.
It is well established principle of law that no amount of evidence can be considered on a plea of fact which was not raised in the pleadings i.e. plaint or written statement, by the parties.
C.P.L.A.174-K/2022
Hafiz Qari Abdul Fateh v. Miss Urooj Fatima & others
Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi
0 Comments