Ahmad and another—Petitioner Versus Manzoor Ahmad—Respondent (Civil Revision No.1611 of 2015), Date of hearing: 31.05.2022.
Before: HON’BLE JUDGE SHAHID BILAL HASSAN, J.
–that declaratory decree can only be passed to the effect of a pre-existing right which is being denied by some person–the respondent based his claim on an oral agreement–alleged oral agreement are not detailed in the plaint, which otherwise ought to have been pleaded and proved and when the position is as such the subject agreement is void for uncertainty in terms of section 29 of the Contract Act, 1872 and consequently it cannot be specifically enforced as enunciated in section 21(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1877.–when the respondent has yet to establish his right on the basis of alleged oral agreement, how can he claim a declaratory decree, because the petitioners have not denied his pre-existing right, which is pre-requisite for seeking a declaratory decree.– the respondent has not pleaded the particulars of alleged oral agreement– cardinal principle of law that no one can be allowed to prove his case beyond the scope of pleadings– the respondent has not led any evidence showing that he was put in possession of the suit pursuant to the alleged oral agreement between him and the petitioner No.1. Not a single word has been uttered about the payment of the consideration amount.
In conclusion, the revision petition was allowed.
Discussed Laws: Specific Relief Act 1877, S.12, S.21, S.42, S.54, –Contract Act 1872 S.29.