Sunday, May 30, 2021

Registered document vs oral evidence

 

2004  SCMR  530    

 

Side Appellant : MUSHTAQ AHMAD 

Side Opponent : MUHAMMAD SAEED 

----S.12---Registration Act (XVI of 1908), S.48---Specific. performance of agreement to sell---Principle of---

Preference of registered document over oral agreement--- Applicability ---Possession of suit-land was handed over to plaintiff in execution of oral agreement of sale--Subsequently the owner of the suit-land executed registered sale-deed in favour of defendants on the basis of another agreement of sale in their favour---Suit filed by the plaintiff was dismissed by the Trial Court but Appellate Court allowed the appeal and decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff---Judgment and decree passed by the Appellate Court were maintained by High Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction---Plea raised by the defendants was that the agreement of sale in favour of the plaintiff was unregistered document which could , not be termed as agreement of sale, while the agreement in their favour was a registered document, therefore, the document in favour of the plaintiff could not be enforced---Validity---Appellate Court and High Court, after taking into consideration the terms of the document in favour of the plaintiff and the evidence produced by the parties, recorded a finding of fact that it was an agreement of sale, therefore, the same could be enforced as such to seek specific performance thereof ---Vendee under unregistered document or agreement was delivered possession, the principle that registered document would take preference over unregistered document would not be applicable in view of S.48 of Registration Act, 1908--Defendants, in their written statement had admitted that possession of the land had been delivered to the plaintiff under the agreement of sale, therefore, no benefit could be claimed under S.48 of Registration Act, 1908, on the ground that agreement in favour of the defendants was a registered document---Execution of sale-deed in favour of defendants by the owner, after execution of the agreement of sale in favour of the plaintiff, could not in any manner detract from the rights of the plaintiff under law as holder of prior agreement of sale vis-a-vis the saledeed specific performance thereof---Findings of fact recorded by the Appellate Court and affirmed by - the High Court had not been shown to be suffering from any legal infirmity such as misreading or non-reading of any material piece of evidence---Appeal was dismissed.


No comments:

Post a Comment

Fasad-fil-Arz

                     No Bail                     Fasad-fil-Arz                       2024 LHC 3700      An offence committed in the name or ...