164/1996 Suit LT.CDR.MIRZA MANSOOR HUSSAIN (Plaintiff) V/S S.MUHAMMAD FAHEEM (Defendant)
Sindh High Court
Bench: Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author)
Order Date: 18-SEP-15
I am of the view that though the defendants No.3 & 4 have not opted to issue public notice before purchase of property however it would be difficult to assume that it was done in bad faith, particularly when the record of the DHA shows the alleged entitlement of defendant No.2 to sale. Off course the defendants No.3 & 4 could not have traced the forgery as now come on surface. More importantly the defendants No.3 and 4 still are in occupation of the premises in question and raised construction at the relevant time. Had there been an iota of fraud they would have got away in these six years i.e. from 1990 to 1996. Since public notice is not considered as a legal requirement it cannot be stretched down to the wire that it was in fact in bad faith. Therefore, it cannot contribute towards mala fide which could cast any shadow on his bona fide. Hence, I am of the view that the issue No.4A is decided in affirmative that the defendant is a bona fide purchaser without notice. The plaintiff is however entitled to claim damages, which are to be calculated according to the market value of the subject plot.Full judgment text for this case is not yet available on Pakistan Law Reports. Check the official Sindh High Court case law portal for the complete order.
This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error,
let us know.