| Case ID |
1ac2fc3d-4ff1-46ff-8aa2-7540c1c05714 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Regular First Appeal No. 43 of 1994/BWP |
| Decision Date |
Oct 03, 1995 |
| Hearing Date |
Oct 03, 1995 |
| Decision |
The Lahore High Court maintained that the dismissal of the plaintiff's suit was valid due to non-compliance with the conditions set by the court. The plaintiff's counsel had the authority to make a statement that bound the plaintiff to deposit the remaining balance by a specified date. The court found no evidence of misrepresentation or misuse of authority by the counsel, and the plaintiff had ratified the actions of his counsel. The High Court determined that the conditions of the earlier order could not be reviewed or set aside. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the trial court's judgment and the proceedings regarding the alleged forgery of the deposit receipt were noted. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around the enforcement of an oral agreement to sell and the implications of legal counsel's authority in binding a client to court orders. The Lahore High Court examined a case where the plaintiff's failure to deposit the required sale price led to the dismissal of their suit. The decision emphasized the importance of adherence to court-imposed conditions and the binding nature of agreements made by legal representatives. The court underscored that a lawyer's consent is valid unless proven otherwise and that clients are generally bound by their counsel's actions, provided there is no fraud or misuse of authority. This ruling is significant for understanding client-attorney dynamics and the enforcement of specific performance in contractual agreements. The case highlights the necessity for plaintiffs to comply with court directives in a timely manner and the potential consequences of failing to do so. Legal practitioners and clients alike should take note of the implications regarding authority and consent in legal proceedings. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
IHSAN-UL-HAQ CHAUDHRY,
M. JAVED BUTTAR
|
| Lawyers |
Aejaz Ahmad Ansari,
Ch. Naseer Ahmad
|
| Petitioners |
ALLAH DITTA
|
| Respondents |
BASHIR AHMED
|
| Citations |
1996 SLD 1425,
1996 CLC 907
|
| Other Citations |
Mst. Noor Jehan v. Azmat Hussain Farooqi and another 1992 SCMR 876,
Qazi Muhammad Tariq v. Hasin Jahan and 3 others 1993 SCMR 1949,
Shahdev v. Lehri Khan and 2 others PLD 1983 Lah. 46,
Gaman and others v. Province of Punjab and others 1989 MLD 4605,
Khushro S. Gandhi and others v. N.A. Guzder and others AIR 1970 SC 1468,
Haji Bostan v. Sahib Shah Ali and others PLD 1982 SC 102,
Mst. Amtul Kabir and others v. Safia Khatoon and others 1990 CLC 1522,
Muhammad Ashraf and others v. Mst. Arshad Begum and others 1990 ALD 597(1),
M/s. Arokey Limited, Karachi and another v. Munir Ahmad Mughal and 3 others PLD 1982 SC 204,
Dr. Ansar Hassan Rizvi v. Syed Mazahir Hussain Zaidi and 3 others 1971 SCMR 634,
Sourendra Nath Mitra and others v. Tarubala Dasi AIR 1930 PC 158
|
| Laws Involved |
Specific Relief Act (I of 1877),
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
|
| Sections |
12,
O.XLIII, R. 1,
O.XLVII, R. 1,
O.111, R. 4
|