1. MUNIB A. KHAN, J. - Learned counsel for the plaintiff states that the. Plaintiff has purchased the House No. R-724, Sector 15-A-5, Buffer Zone, North Karachi in a sum of Rs. 15,20,000/- through sale agreement dated 21.10.2003 and paid a sum of Rs. 50,000/- through pay order dated 20.10.2003 and according to clause (2) of the Sale Agreement, the balance payment of Rs. 14,70,000/- was to be made and possession was to be delivered by the plaintiff within six months from the date of execution of sale agreement, but the defendant failed to hand over the possession as the ground floor was under the tenancy with defendant No. 2 (who has been dropped as a defendant by order dated 20.2.2006). He further submits that5 upon the ( assurance of the defendant to get the vacant possession from the tenant, he paid a further sum of Rs. 14,00,000/- in cash through a supplementary agreement dated 8.4.2004, leaving the balance of Rs. 70,000/- only to be paid at the time of physical possession of the property as well as delivery of title documents. He further submits that the plaintiff has been trying to get the later agreement implemented, but on failure of the defendant this suit has been filed.
2. On the other hand learned counsel for the defendant has admitted the sale agreement dated 21.10.2003 as well as payment of Rs. 50,000/- through pay order but has submitted that the plaintiff being an Estate Agent kept the defendant on promises and failed to pay the balance amount of Rs.
3. 14,70,000/- within six months which expired on 20.4.2004, hence that amount has been forfeited. He further submits that the alleged supplementary agreement of sale dated 8.4.2004 was never executed by the defendant No. 1 nor it contains signature of the defendant and that its main page No. 2 containing important terms is without signature of either of the party. He requests for dismissal of the application as plaintiff himself failed to honour this commitment otherwise the defendant was ready to go with the sale agreement dated 21.10.2003.
4. After hearing of the learned counsel and perusal of the record, I, in terms of Article 84 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 have firstly compared the signature of the defendant on the admitted agreement of sale dated 21.10.2003 with the supplementary agreement of sale dated 8.4.2004. The said signature does not tally with each other while the important page No. 2 of supplementary agreement containing payment clause etc. Is unsigned by either of the party, It can be observed from the facts that the plaintiff entered into sale agreement dated 21.10.2003 and paid initial amount of Rs. 50,000/- through pay order to establish some record but is very strange that the plaintiff has paid a huge sum of Rs. 14,00,000/- in cash without any proof and without taking possession or at least the title document which are still with the defendant No. 1. The contention of the plaintiff needs supporting evidence but at the moment and in the absence that supporting evidence, balance of inconvenience is not on the side of the plaintiff, In the circumstances application CMA No. 2180/06 is dismissed.