Oral Agreement to Sell
2017 CLC 996 Lahore (J. Ch. Muhammad Masood Jahangir )
Suit for specific performance—Oral agreement
Neither any date, month or year of bargain were feel mentioned in the plaint, nor names of witnesses were provided therein to prove that as to when and where and before whom the said transaction was settled ---- Held : Evidence if any led to prove the said fact, was to be simply ignored. Suit dismissed.
It was also alleged in the suit the a receipt in respect of bargain was executed by the defendant but defendant denied the execution of said receipt and pleaded that receipt to be forged and fictitious – Held : Admittedly the receipt was not attested by any of the witness, whereas Arts. 17(2)(a) & 79 of QSO provides that in matter pertaining to financial or future obligation, if reduced into writing, the document should be attested by two men / one man and two women – and such document could not be used as document until two attested witnesses were not examined.
Onus to prove --- Beneficiary of document was bound to produce positive evidence to prove the execution, and stage of rebuttal or disproof would only come into play when beneficiary of transaction succeeded to produce positive evidence to prove his case.
Presumption in case of denial of Signature : Art. 61 QSO – where alleged executant/defendant denied his signatures on alleged receipt, plaintiff should apply to the court for getting the signature of the defendant/executant compared from the expert. Plaintiff having not done the same, incurred presumption against him.
