Munir A. Sheikh, J.--This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 19.9.1997 of the Peshawar High Court whereby on acceptance of appeal filed by the respondents against the judgment and decree of the trial Court dated 13.1.1993 of dismissal of their suit for specific performance of agreement of sale, the case has been remanded with permission to the plaintiffs to amend the plaint to claim consequential relief of recovery of compensation awarded under the Land Acquisition Act against the land in question after its acquisition.
2. The respondents filed suit for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 21.7.1990. During the pendency of the suit, the land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act. The trial Court upheld the objection raised on behalf of the defendants that in such situation, the agreement of sale stood frustrated as the vendor was no longer vested with the ownership rights in the property and the suit dismissed through judgment dated 13.1.1993 against which appeal filed by the respondents has been accepted by the Peshawar High Court and the case remanded as noted above.
3. On the last date of hearing i,e, 30.10.2003, the case was adjourned for today on the request of Mr. Abdul Samad Khan, ASC, learned counsel for the appellants. An application was filed by Ch. Muhammad Akram, AOR on 10.11.2003 for adjournment of the case on the ground that Mr. Abdul Samad, ASC, was indisposed. Mr. Abdul Samad, ASC appeared before this Court Yesterday in a case.
4. We are not inclined to adjourn the case and asked Ch. Muhammad Akram, AOR to address arguments in support of this appeal. He expressed his inability to do so, therefore, we proceed to decide the appeal on merits after examining the record and hearing learned counsel for the respondents.
5. It has been consistently held by the superior Courts in the cases of Joydeb Agarwala versus Baitulmal Karkhana ,Ltd. (PLD 1965 SC 37), Pirzada Amir Hassan and others versus Mrs. Shamim Shah Nawaz and others (1984 CLC 3080) and Haji Hakeem Gul and others versus Madad Khan and others (1998 M LD 1260) that acquisition of land does not in any manner frustrate the agreement of sale, for if a decree is granted for specific performance of the same, the vendee would step into the shoes of the vendor for the purpose of receipt of compensation awarded qua the acquisition.
6. In view of this, the impugned judgment does not suffer from any illegible, therefore, this appeal has no merits which is accordingly dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
7. Keeping in view that the case is fairly old one, the trial Court is hereby directed to decide the same expeditiously and dispose of the same before 31.7.2004.