Suit for specific performance--Decreed with direction to payment of stamp duty as per market value--Sale agreement






PLJ 2022 Lahore 484

Specific Relief Act, 1877 (I of 1877)--

----S. 12--Suit for specific performance--Decreed with direction to payment of stamp duty as per market value--Sale agreement--Appeal--Dismissed--Challenge to--If legality of impugned decisions of Courts below are adjudged on touchstone of afore-referred judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court there leaves no ambiguity that same have been passed strictly in accordance with law on subject--Though counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners has addressed Court at certain length but failed to point out any illegality or jurisdictional defect in impugned judgments and decrees of Courts below justifying interference by this Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction--Civil revision was dismissed.                                                                        [P. 490] D

Stamp Act, 1899 (II of 1899)--

----S. 27-A--Excessive value of property--Moreover, as per proviso to Section 27-A of Act, if value of property mentioned in valuation table appears to be excessive, then aggrieved party may apply to Commissioner or any other person notified by Government and who shall determine correct value of property.            [P. 488] A

Registration Act, 1908 (XVI of 1908)--

----S. 80--Determination of fee--All fees payable on a document shall be determined according rate prevalent at date of its presentation.                                                                                  

                                                                                             [P. 489] B

Punjab Registration Rules, 1929--

----R. 112--Duty of registration officer--A document which is presented for registration is required to be stamped as per stamp duty applicable on such day, when it is presented and it is duty of Registration Officer to examine document in order to determine whether it bears requisite stamps or requisite stamp duty has been paid.         [P. 489] C

2016 SCMR 203 ref.

Ch. Muhammad Afzal, Advocate for Petitioners

Nemo for Respondent No. 3.

Date of hearing: 23.2.2022


For more information call us 0092-324-4010279 Whatsapp Dear readers if u like this post plz comments and follow us. Thanks for reading .as you know our goal is to aware people of their rights and how can get their rights. we will answer every question, so we need your help to achieve our goal. plz tell people about this blog and subscribe to our youtube channel and follow us at the end of this post.








































 
































Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Property ki taqseem ,Warasat main warson ka hisa

Bachon Ka Kharcha Lena After separation | bachon ka kharcha after divorce | How much child maintenance should a father pay in Pakistan? Case laws about maintenance case.

Bachon ki custody of minors after divorce or separation