The Plaintiff has to Pay the Remaining Sale Consideration According to the Present Market Value.


๐“๐ก๐ž ๐๐ฅ๐š๐ข๐ง๐ญ๐ข๐Ÿ๐Ÿ ๐ก๐š๐ฌ ๐ญ๐จ ๐๐š๐ฒ ๐ญ๐ก๐ž ๐‘๐ž๐ฆ๐š๐ข๐ง๐ข๐ง๐  ๐’๐š๐ฅ๐ž ๐‚๐จ๐ง๐ฌ๐ข๐๐ž๐ซ๐š๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง ๐€๐œ๐œ๐จ๐ซ๐๐ข๐ง๐  ๐ญ๐จ ๐ญ๐ก๐ž ๐๐ซ๐ž๐ฌ๐ž๐ง๐ญ ๐Œ๐š๐ซ๐ค๐ž๐ญ ๐•๐š๐ฅ๐ฎ๐ž. ๐๐‡๐‚

The usual practice of our courts is that the plaintiff is directed on the first day of the case to deposit the remaining sale consideration in suits of specific performance. The suit is dismissed if the plaintiff fails to deposit the said amount. Similarly, the very amount of the remaining sale consideration is deposited which is agreed between the parties, not less nor more than that.

๐ƒ๐ž๐ฏ๐ข๐š๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง ๐Ÿ๐ซ๐จ๐ฆ ๐ญ๐ก๐ž ๐”๐ฌ๐ฎ๐š๐ฅ ๐๐ซ๐š๐œ๐ญ๐ข๐œ๐ž:

The Peshawar High Court has, however, recently decided a case wherein the High Court has deviated from this usual practice and not only condoned the failure of the plaintiff to deposit the remaining sale consideration but has also modified the remaining sale consideration by directing the plaintiff to pay the remaining sale consideration of the property as per the present market value of the portion of the property for which the consideration is unpaid yet.ย  The Court noted that the agreement of sale was executed between the parties in 2001, two decades ago when the value of the suit property was much less than today. Hence, the Court interfered in the judgments of the two courts below and directed the plaintiff to pay the remaining sale consideration as per the present market value of the property.

๐€๐›๐ฌ๐ž๐ง๐œ๐ž ๐จ๐Ÿ ๐’๐ข๐ ๐ง๐š๐ญ๐ฎ๐ซ๐ž ๐จ๐ง ๐ญ๐ก๐ž ๐€๐ ๐ซ๐ž๐ž๐ฆ๐ž๐ง๐ญ:

Another important point in this case was that the sale agreement was not signed by the defendants and they were denying the execution of the same. However, the Court held that the execution of the agreement has been proved by the evidence of the two witnesses. Thus, absence of signature of the defendants is not fatal for the veracity of the agreement.

Click to Downloadย 

2023 C L C 2019

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top