Mst. NOOR BIBI And 9 Others vs GHULAM RASOOL
This petition for leave to appeal challenged a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which had reversed the concurrent findings of two lower courts and decreed a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell. The core legal question concerned whether the High Court was justified in reversing the findings of the lower courts regarding the execution of the sale agreement. The Supreme Court observed that the High Court had correctly identified a misreading of evidence by the lower courts. Specifically, the High Court relied on the testimony of the scribe of the sale agreement, who, despite having closer familial and personal ties to the petitioners (the legal heirs of the deceased vendor), testified in support of the respondent's claim. The Supreme Court held that the High Court's reliance on this testimony was appropriate, noting there was no evidence of fraud in the execution of the document. Consequently, the Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's decision and dismissed the petition, finding no grounds for further interference.
- Can the High Court reverse concurrent findings of lower courts based on a misreading of evidence?
- Is the testimony of a scribe who is related to the opposing party sufficient to support the validity of a sale agreement?
- Does the absence of evidence of fraud support the validity of a contested agreement to sell?
ORDER
1. S. USMAN ALI SHAH, J.---Leave to appeal has been sought by the petitioners against the order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 13-1-1987, whereby regular second appeal of the respondent against the orders of the two Courts below was accepted and his suit was decreed.
2. Nabi Bakhsh predecessor-in-interest of the present petitioners sold the property in dispute to Ghulam Rasool respondent on the basis of an agreement of sale dated 14-12-1970. He died issueless and without wife on 9-8-1971. The respondent brought a suit for specific performance against the petitioners being legal heirs of the vendor.
3. The two Courts below held that no agreement to sell was executed between Nabi Bakhsh deceased and the respondent Ghulam Rasool. On regular second appeal by the respondent, the learned High Court reversed the findings of the two Courts below and decreed the respondents' suit for specific performance, mainly on the ground of misreading of evidence. The learned High Court believed the statement of P.W. Noor Muhammad who was the witness of the documents. A perusal of the record shows that the said Noor Muhammad, the scribe of the sale agreement has plainly stated in his statement that he is more nearly related and has deeper connections with the petitioners than the respondent, even then he has supported the said agreement of sale-deed in favour the respondent. Thus we are of the view that his statement has rightly been considered by the High Court. There is no evidence on record that the said document was executed by fraudulent manner.
4. Under the circumstances, we do not think it is a fit case for further consideration of this Court. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.
Cited by 6 cases
- Allah Bakhsh vs Ghulam Mustafa & another 2021 LHC 4859, 2024 YLR 871
- FAZAL WAHID Versus Sayed AHMAD alias Ahmed Sayed 2020 CLC 1600
- Hafiz TASSADUQ HUSSAIN vs MUHAMMAD DIN through Legal Heirs and others 2011 PLD Supreme Court 241
- Syed KHURSHID AHMED alias WAHID HUSSAIN through General Attorney vs Rao MUHAMMAD AKRAM KHAN 2000 CLC 825
- MUHAMMAD ZAFARYAB and 2 others vs Malik MUHAMMAD IQBAL and anothers 2000 YLR 1468
- SYED KHURSHID AHMED Alias WAHID HUSSAIN vs RAO MUHAMMAD AKRAM K.L.R. 2000 Civil Cases 116