👋 Welcome, visitor from Columbus, US!

2215/2014 Suit Muhammad Kashif Vohra. (Plaintiff) V/S Muhammad Ismail & Others. (Defendant)

Sindh High CourtProperty & Rent2019

Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author)

Share on WhatsApp

2215/2014 Suit Muhammad Kashif Vohra. (Plaintiff) V/S Muhammad Ismail & Others. (Defendant) Sindh High Court

Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry(Author) Order Date: 26-NOV-19

1. A suit for specific performance of contract of immovable property brought by the vendee can be dismissed without going through a trial where the plaintiff, when put on terms to deposit the sale consideration in Court, fails to do so. That has been the consistent approach on the Original side of this Court. The wisdom behind that of course is that when called upon by the Court, if the plaintiff/vendee cannot demonstrate that he is ready and willing to make payment to perform his part of the contract, which is the primary test for grant of equitable discretionary relief in a suit for specific performance, then that is sufficient reason for the Court to decline the exercise of discretionary jurisdiction. Rel: Allah Ditta v. Bashir Ahmed (1997 SCMR 181); Abdul Hameed Khan v. Ghulam Rabbani (2003 SCMR 953); and Hamood Mehmood v. Shabana Ishaque (2017 SCMR 2022); 2. It is not in every case that the Court may require the plaintiff of a suit for specific performance of contract to deposit the sale consideration in Court. Rel: Bin Bak Industries (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Friends Associates (2003 SCMR 238).

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.

Related judgments

Arbitration Judgment in Aviation Case by Supreme Court of Pakistan

PLJ 2018 SC 504 · Sindh High Court · 2018

Contract which is in its nature revocable cannot be specifically enforced

PLJ 2016 · Sindh High Court · 2016

Review of Order of Board

PLJ 2013 · Sindh High Court · 2013

Contents of Plaint are important for Rejection of Plaint

PLJ 2009 · Sindh High Court · 2009

Termination of Agency of Contract

PLJ 2007 · Sindh High Court · 2007