Pakistan Case LawASMATULLAH KHAN and others Versus JHANGI KHAN and others
This matter arises from two appeals by special leave directed against the judgment of the Peshawar High Court, which affirmed the concurrent dismissal of two cross-suits filed by the respective parties. The core legal question involved the determination of disputed questions of fact regarding a monetary claim for the recovery of Rs. 3,00,000 based on an alleged unfulfilled agreement to purchase immovable property, and a cross-suit seeking a declaration of ownership of a house or alternatively the return of earnest money. The Supreme Court held that the concurrent findings of fact recorded by both the trial court and the High Court suffered from no infirmity, and the evidence regarding the disputed payment was too scanty to support either party's version. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed as being without merit. The key principle laid down is that the Supreme Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact by lower courts in the absence of any legal infirmity or misreading of evidence.
- Will the Supreme Court interfere with concurrent findings of fact by lower courts in the absence of legal infirmity?
- Can a civil suit for recovery succeed when the evidence regarding the nature of payment is scanty and inconclusive?
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---These are two appeals by special leave from the judgment dated 3-12-1991 of the Peshawar High Court, Dera Isma il Khan Bench, whereby the judgment and decree of the Civil Judge, Tank, dismissing the two cross-suits filed by the parties were affirmed.
2.On 19-9-1985 Jhangi Khan, appellant in Civil Appeal No, 457/1992 and respondent in Civil Appeal No, 456/1992 filed a suit for the recovery of Rs,3,00,000 against Asmatullah Khan, appellant in Civil Appeal No, 456/1992 and respondent in Civil Appeal No, 457/1992. He alleged that he had given Rs,5,00,000 to Asmatullah Khan for purchasing immovable property for him. Asmatullah Khan did not purchase any property and on his demand he returned only Rs,2,00,000 through a bank draft and kept back rest of the amount. On 16-11-1985 Asmatullah Khan also brought a suit against Jhangi Khan for a declaration to the effect that he Was the owner in possession of a house situate on Dera Tank Road, Tank. He alleged that the house belonged to Jhangi Khan who had undertaken to sell the same to him. By way of consideration Jhangir Khan had received Rs,5,90,000 and only a sum of Rs,10,000 remained payable. In the alternative, he asked for a decree against Jhangi Khan for the return of the purchase amount which he had so far paid to the latter together with a penalty.
3.The two suits were tried together. The learned trial Court held that Jhangi Khan had not been able to prove that he had given Rs,5,00,000 to Asmatullah Khan. It also held that Asmatullah Khan had failed to establish that Jhangi Khan had agreed to sell his house to him or had received a substantial part of consideration. Accordingly, it dismissed both the suits.
4.Both parties filed regular first appeals in the High Court. A Division Bench affirmed the findings of the trial Court and dismissed the appeals.
5.The propositions being canvassed in these two appeals relate to questions of fact. The findings of the High Court and the trial Court on these questions are concurrent and learned counsel appearing for the parties in neither of these two appeals have been able to show that these findings suffer from any infirmity.
6.It is common ground between the parties that at one stage Asmatullah Khan had paid Rs,2,00,000 to Jhangi Khan by a bank draft but the evidence with regard to the nature of the payment is so scanty that it is difficult to regard it as supporting either of the two versions. These appeals are without any merit and are hereby dismissed. Parties to bear their own costs.
Judges on this bench
- Saad Saood Jan2,559 judgments
- Muhammad Rafiq Tarar605 judgments
- Saleem Akhtar1,928 judgments