70/2016 II.A. Muhammad Farooq (Appellant) V/S Ranomal and others (Respondent)
Bench: Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author)
70/2016 II.A. Muhammad Farooq (Appellant) V/S Ranomal and others (Respondent) Sindh High Court
Bench: Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Muhammad Shafi Siddiqui(Author) Order Date: 08-APR-21
I have reached to the conclusion that perhaps these power of attorney and sub-power of attorney are to be read with the sale agreement and sale consideration and the contents of the power of attorney which may be looked into in terms of Section 200 and 202 of the Contract Act and some view had to be formed whether it coupled with interest. In that case if the property was not enjoyed by Safari Construction (Pvt.) Limited it was surely enjoyed by one of the Directors i.e. Allah Dino Behan and at one point of time the widow of Allah Dino Behan i.e. Mominat Behan, may be as chief executive of Safari Construction (Pvt.) Limited, entered into agreement of sale, having share in it. The sale consideration for plot was paid by Allah Dino Behan. If at all for any technical reason the performance could not be sought against Safari Construction (Pvt.) Limited, it could well be asked against an individual Allah Dino Behan and/or widow Mominat who acquired share in it when she entered into agreement.