Oral Agreement for Property Sale in Pakistan: What You Need to Know (Case Study)
2017 CLC 996 Lahore
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.
Explanation of the Judgement
The passage of the Lahore High Court Judgment describes a court case in Pakistan concerning an alleged oral agreement to sell a property. Here's a breakdown:
Scenario:
The seller (defendant) supposedly agreed to sell a property to the buyer (plaintiff) through an oral agreement.
Note that there's no written contract documenting the agreement.
Plaintiff's Claim (Suit for Specific Performance):
The buyer wants the court to enforce the alleged oral agreement and compel the seller to complete the sale.
Issues with the Claim:
Missing Details: The lawsuit lacks crucial details like the date, month, and year of the agreement. Additionally, no witness names are mentioned to substantiate the claim.
Unverified Receipt: The buyer claims a receipt exists as proof of the agreement, but the seller denies its authenticity.
Court's Decision:
Due to the absence of a written and witnessed contract, the court dismisses the case.
The judge reasons that even if evidence for the oral agreement existed, it wouldn't be considered due to the lack of proper documentation.
The court highlights the importance of following the law (QSO - The Transfer of Property Act, 1882).
Legal Requirements (QSO):
According to the QSO, agreements involving financial or future obligations exceeding a certain amount (not mentioned here) must be in writing and attested by two witnesses (two men or one man and two women).
Without such a document and witness testimonies, the agreement is considered invalid in the court's eyes.
Conclusion:
In Pakistan, relying solely on oral agreements for property sales exceeding a specific value is risky. The law emphasizes the need for written and witnessed contracts to ensure enforceability in court.