Case ID |
1ab83444-1e7f-4b5e-8bb9-3067775923b8 |
Body |
View case body. Login to View |
Case Number |
R.F.A. No. 140 of 2003 |
Decision Date |
Jun 27, 2006 |
Hearing Date |
Jun 14, 2006 |
Decision |
The appeal was accepted, and a decree for recovery of Rs. 45,00,000 along with 6% profit/interest was granted in favor of the plaintiff. The trial court's dismissal of the suit was overturned based on substantial evidence of the promissory note's execution and the transfer of funds between the parties. The court clarified that the issue of stamp duty was between the state and the party using the deficiently stamped document, and the plaintiff was ordered to rectify any deficiencies in stamp duty within a month. |
Summary |
In the case of R.F.A. No. 140 of 2003, the Peshawar High Court addressed a dispute regarding a promissory note executed for a loan of Rs. 45,00,000. The plaintiff, Masood Anwar, claimed that the respondent, Sabir Khan, defaulted on the repayment. The trial court dismissed the suit, citing issues with the execution of the promissory note and its admissibility due to insufficient stamping. However, upon appeal, the High Court found that the evidence presented, including testimonies from marginal witnesses and notary public verification, substantiated the plaintiff's claims. The court emphasized that minor discrepancies in witness statements did not undermine the overall credibility of the evidence. The decision reinforces the importance of proper documentation in loan agreements and clarifies legal interpretations related to stamp duty in promissory notes. |
Court |
Peshawar High Court
|
Entities Involved |
Not available
|
Judges |
SALIM KHAN,
HAMID FAROOQ DURRANI
|
Lawyers |
Younus Khan Tanoli,
Malik Mehmood
|
Petitioners |
MASOOD ANWAR
|
Respondents |
SABIR KHAN
|
Citations |
2006 SLD 440,
2006 PLD 208,
2007 PLJ 7
|
Other Citations |
PLD 1978 SC 279,
PLD 2003 Lah. 173
|
Laws Involved |
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908),
Stamp Act, of 1899
|
Sections |
O.XXXVII,Rr.2,3,
5
|