ABDUL AZIZ And 2 Others vs SIKANDAR ALI
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by Abdul Aziz and two others against Sikandar Ali, reported as 1991 SCMR 1347. The core legal question was whether possession under an agreement to sell amounts to possession under a sale and whether a question of law arose from the concurrent findings of the lower courts. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that the three lower courts had consistently recorded concurrent findings of fact against the petitioners on this controverted question, and no question of law arose for consideration. Consequently, the Court refused leave to appeal, affirming the concurrent factual determinations.
- Does possession under an agreement to sell amount to possession under sale?
- Can leave to appeal be granted when three lower courts have recorded concurrent findings of fact on a controverted issue?
- Does a question of law arise from concurrent factual determinations regarding possession under an agreement to sell?
ORDER
1. SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J: --The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that possession under agreement to sell amounts to possession under sale, that such possession was delivered under agreement to sell. The three Courts have recorded on that controverted question of fact against the petitioners. No question of law arises. Therefore, leave to appeal is refused.