Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
1987 SCMR 1481

ALI ASGHAR And Another vs MUHAMMAD RAMZAN And Other

Citation1987 SCMR 1481
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 588 of 1980 Civil Revision No. 193 of
Date1987-06-09
Judge(s)Aslam Riaz Hussain, Saad Saood Jan
ResultLeave granted

ORDER

SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--The petitioners filed a suit for pre-emption. It was decreed on 21-10-1978 and they were directed to deposit the purchase money before 19-11-1978. In the event of their failure to make the deposit their suit was to stand dismissed. They preferred an appeal before the Additional District Judge challenging the amount which they had been called upon to deposit. On 18-11-1978 the Additional District Judge admitted the appeal to regular hearing and adjourned it to 17-12-1978.

He also extended the time for the deposit of the purchase money till that date. On 17-12-1978 he again adjourned the hearing and further directed that the petitioners might not deposit the purchase money till further orders. Nevertheless, the petitioners deposited the purchase money on 18-12-1978.

2. When the appeal came up for hearing it was discovered that the memorandum had been deficiently stamped. Instead of making up the deficiency the petitioners withdrew the appeal.

Subsequently, they filed an application for execution of the decree. An objection was raised on behalf of the vendees that as the petitioners had not deposited the purchase money by the date specified in the decree of the trial Court their suit stood dismissed in terms thereof and as such the question of its execution did not arise. This objection found favour with the Executing Court and it dismissed the application for execution. Its order was upheld by the Additional District Judge in appeal and by the High Court in revisional jurisdiction. The petitioners now seek leave to appeal from this Court.

3. It is contended in support of this petition that after the petitioners had deposited the purchase money within the period extended by the District Judge it could not be said that there had been a non-compliance of the terms of the decree; as such the executing Court ought not to have declined to execute the decree. This contention needs examination. Leave to appeal is granted.

Security for costs in the sum of Rs.2000/-. The appeal may be made ready for hearing on the present record with permission to the parties to file additional documents, if any.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch