' The petitioner filed a suit for specific performance of oral agreement of sale in respect of the suit land. The same was contested and was in progress when the petitioner made a statement on 23- 6-1996 to the effect that he was prepared to take special Oath on Holy Qur'an in favour of his case and if this was acceptable to the defendant-respondent, his suit be decreed. On the contrary, if the defendant-respondent did not accept his Oath, the defendant-respondent himself should take special Oath and in that case the petitioner's suit be dismissed and further that if the defendant- respondent did not give Oath as above the suit be decreed. This offer was accepted by Muhammad Ramzan, father of the defendant. On 28-10-1996, the defendant-respondent took Oath in support of his case and stated that he had not received any money as sale price from the plaintiff-petitioner nor he ever agreed to sell his land. On this, the plaintiff-petitioner's suit was dismissed. Notwithstanding the disposal of suit on special Oath, the dismissal of the suit was challenged in appeal but the same was dismissed.
2. In this revision it is argued that the offer was accepted by Muhammad Ramzan, father of the respondent who had no authority. This argument has no force because in spite of it, the respondent took Oath which meant that he ratified the acceptance of offer by his father. It is next contended that since the evidence had been recorded, the case should have been decided on merits notwithstanding the offer of Special Oath. This contention again has no force.
Notwithstanding the fact that the case was ripe for decision on merits the same could still be disposed of on Special Oath provided the parties agreed to the same. The petitioner himself agreed to have his suit decided on Special Oath and having failed, cannot be permitted to turn around and challenge the course adopted by him. There is no force in this revision which is dismissed in limine.