Pakistan Case Law← Search
1989 MLD 21

SHAMA ENTERPRISES (PRIVATE) LTD vs Malik GHULAM SARWAR And Other

Citation1989 MLD 21
CourtSindh High Court
Case No.High Court Appeal No. 82 of 1988
Date1988-08-15
Judge(s)Ajmal Mian, Ahmed Ali U. Qureshi
ResultAppeal dismissed

ORDER

1. AJMAL MIAN, J.--This is an appeal against an order dated 30-5-1988 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court m Suit No. 297 of 1988 upon C.MA. No. 2371 of 1988 dismissing the appellant's application for grant of ad---interim injunction in respect of the suit land, which has been filed by the appellant for specific performance of a sale agreement, dated 14th November, 1987 for land measuring 9.8 acres situated at Deh Joreji Tappo Darsano, Taluka and District Karachi East. The learned Single Judge while hearing the above application enquired from the appellant, whether he was willing to deposit the balance of the sale consideration m terms of the sale agreement, the appellant showed his unwillingness to deposit the balance of the sale consideration but stated that he was ready to furnish the security. The learned Single Judge dismissed the above application on the ground that the appellant was not willing to deposit the balance of the sale consideration. The appellant being' aggrieved by the above order has filed the present appeal: We have heard Mr. Atash Mirza, learned counsel for the appellant, who states that the suit has not been listed for final disposal and, therefore, the hearing of the above appeal may be deferred.

2. We have noticed from the diary that this is the third date of hearing for Katcha Peshi. In a suit for specific performance when appellant seeks an injunction in respect of the suit property, the Court normally order the deposit of the balance of the sale consideration in the Court in order to see, whether factually the plaintiff was ready and willing to Perform his part of the sale agreement in respect of which the performance is sought. The order under appeal seems to be in consonance with law and does not call for interference. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed in limine.

Cited by 6 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
Disclaimer·Privacy·Terms·Search