Anwar-Ul-Haq And Other vs Muhammad Akram
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which upheld concurrent findings of the lower courts regarding a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell. The petitioners had entered into an agreement to sell a plot on 26.10.1986 and received consideration of Rs. 21,000/- but subsequently failed to fulfill their contractual obligations. The trial court and the district court decreed the suit in favor of the respondent, finding that the petitioners had breached the agreement. The High Court, in its revisional jurisdiction, maintained these concurrent findings after reviewing the evidence. Before the Supreme Court, the petitioners failed to demonstrate any legal infirmity or illegality in the impugned judgment. The Supreme Court held that the determination of facts by the lower courts, supported by cogent reasons and evidence, did not warrant interference. Consequently, the Court found no merit in the petition, affirming that where concurrent findings of fact are based on evidence, they are not to be disturbed in the absence of legal error.
- Can the Supreme Court interfere with concurrent findings of fact by lower courts in the absence of legal infirmity?
- Is a suit for specific performance maintainable where the seller has received consideration but failed to honor the agreement?
TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.- Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment dated 21.5.2001 whereby the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dismissed the civil revision filed by the petitioners, maintaining the concurrent findings of the Courts below i.e. The learned Civil Judge, Narowal dated 7.6.1994 and the learned District Judge, Narowal dated 8.3.2000.
2. We need not to give details of the facts as the same have been amply dealt with the Courts below.
3. Admittedly the petitioners got executed an agreement to sell dated 26.10.1986 and received an amount of Rs. 21,000/- as consideration for the disputed plot. They failed to honour the commitment made in the agreement as such the learned Courts below took right view in decreeing the suit for specific performance of agreement, filed by the respondent. A question' of fact after scanning the evidence has been determined by the Courts which determination has been maintained by the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court by advancing cogent reasons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitions has failed to point out any illegality or legal infirmity in the impugned judgment.
Resultantly, this petition has no merit which is, accordingly, dismissed and leave refused.
Accordingly.