SECOND APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNED JUDGEMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY LOWER

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE

R.S.A NO­­­­_______________________/2014

M.FAROOQ-E-AZAM etc....Vs....KHURMAT KHAN

I     N     D    E     X

SR# DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENTS       DATED     PAGES

1.      OPENING SHEET-------------------E

1.       .                                                                      05.02.2014    01

2.      SECOND APPEAL                                                                        05.02.2014   O1A-15

3.      MEMO OF PARTIES.                                                                  05.02.2014     16

4.      AFFIDAVIT.                                                                                 05.02.2014    17

5.      ANNEXURE-A,PLAINT.                                                                                      18-21

6.      ANNEXURE-B,WRITTEN STATEMENT.                                                             22-24

7.      ANNEXURE-C,ORAL EVIDENCE                                                                        25-36

8.      ANNEXURE-D,DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE                                                      37-63

9.      ANNEXURE-E,IMPUGNED JUDGEMENT& DECREE 20-12-2012                      64-72

10.  ANNEXURE-F,APPEAL                                                                                       73-78

11.  ANNEXURE-G,JUDGEMENT& DECREE 05.09.2013                                          79-91

12.  APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY                         05.02.2014     92-93

13.  AFFIDAVIT.                                                                                 05.02.2014    94-95

14.  STAY APPLICATION                                                                    05.02.2014     96-97

15.  AFFIDAVIT.                                                                                 05.02.2014     98-99

16.  POWER OF ATTORNEY.

APPELLANTS

THROUGH COUNSELS:

1.            

2.                                                           DATED: 05 .02.2014

                                       

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT ,LAHORE

R.S.A NO­­­­_______________________/2014

1. MUHAMMAD FAROOQ-E-AZAM S/O HASHMAL KHAN (Deceased)

2. TANVIR AHMAD (MINOR) S/O HASHMAL KHAN through his real brother MUHAMMAD FAROOQ-E-AZAM  

3.NUSRAT BIBI                            ]

4.RAZIA BIBI                                ] Daughters of Hashmal      

5.NASREEN BIBI                          ] khan

6.NASEEM BIBI                           ]

7.SHAMIM BIBI (MINOR)          [ Daughters of

8.RUQAYYA BIBI(MINOR)            HASHMAL KHAN]

Through their real brother Muhammad Farooq-e-Azam

9.FAJRO KHAN                            ]

10.MAHMOOD AHMAD KHAN] SONS OF KHAIRATI

11.IQBAL                                      ] KHAN

12.SHER MUHAMMAD              ]

13.UMAR DIN                              ]

14.RAQM-UD-DIN                       ] SONS OF CHANDAR

15.MUHAMMAD ARSHAD        ]KHAN

16.DIN MUHAAMMAD              ]

17ABDUL RAZZAQ                      ]

All by caste Meo,residents of sarhali kalan.Tehsil & District Kasur.

APPELLANTS

VERSUS

KHURMAT KHAN SON OF GHUMAN KHAN (S/O Mst.CHANDO) CASTE MEO, R/O KHARA TEHSIL & DISTRICT, KASUR.

RESPONDENT

SECOND APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNED JUDGEMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY LOWER LEARNED APPELLATE COURT DATED 05-09-2013.

RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH,

1.                That the concise facts giving rise to the filing of the instant R.S.A. are that the appellants/plaintiffs filed a suit for possession through specific performance of Agreement to sell dated 12-08-2003 regarding the land measuring 02-kanals, 15 Marlas,being Khata no.42 Khatoni nos.89 to 91and 05-kanals, 03 Marlas being Khewat No.430,Khatoni Nos.687-686(total measuring 07 kanals, 18 Marlas),situated in Mouza Bhuja, Tehsil & District Kasur, in which,the plaintiffs/appellants contended thst the plaintiffs No.6 to 17 alongwith Hashmal khan entered into contract with Hashmal Khan on 12-08-2003 and paid earnest money of Rs.1,35,000/-as mentioned above.one week prior to filing of the suit, the plaintiffs asked the defendant that they had managed the remaining amount and they should got registered the deed in favour of the plaintiffs/appellants before Sub-Registrar, but the defendant refused to admit the same and stated that due to enhancement of price, he would not complete the agreement to sell for which he was time and again asked the defendant to fulfil his obligation but he denied to pay any heed on the request of the plaintiffs/appellants. Copy of plaint is attached herewith as ANNEXURE-A  

2.                That the defendant/respondent contested the suit by filing the written statement, wherein,he raised preliminary objections that the plaintiffs have no cause of action to file the suit and controverted the facts of the plaint and prayed for dismissal of the suit. Copy of written statement is attached as ANNEXURE-B

3.                That out divergent pleadings of the parties ,the learned trial court framed the following issues:

1.    Whether plaintiffs are entitled to possession through specific performance of agreement to sell dated 12-08-2003 in respect of land measuring 05-Kanal 03-Marla in Khata no.42,Khatoni no.89 to 91 total land measuring 07 Kanals,18 Marlas to the extent of transferred share, situated in Mouza Sirhali Kalan,Tehsil & district Kasur? OPP

2.    Whether sale consideration was Rs,1,40,000/-out of which Rs.1,355,000/- has been paid to defendant Rs.5000/- is to be paid? OPP

3.    Whether plaintiffs have no cause of action to file this suit? OPD        

4.    Whether impugned agreement to sell is fake forged and suit is, therefore, not maintainable? OPD

5.    Relief .

4.    That after framing the aforesaid issues, the learned trial court directed of both parties to adduce their oral as well as documentary evidence in order to prove their respective contentions. The plaintiff/appellant no. 12 appeared as PW-1,and produced Muhammad Tayyab as PW-2,Muhammad Asghar as PW-3.In the documentary evidence plaintiffs placed on record original agreement to sell as Ex.P1 and copy of Mutation No.1961 as Ex.P/2,Fard Jamabandi as Ex.P/3.The defendant/respondent himself appeared as DW-1 and produced Muhammad Islam as DW-2, Muhammad Rafique as DW-3.In documentary evidence,he produced attested copy of proceedings for redemption of mortgage evidence,Kasur as Ex.D.1,attested copy of record of rights for the year 2008-09 as Ex.D.2.Copies of evidence (Oral and Documentary) of both the parties are attached as ANNEXURE-C & D

5.    That the learned trial court without perusing the record of the case and without applying his judicious and independet mind.dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs/appellants vide Judgement & Decree dated 15-12-2012. Copy of Judgement & Decree dated 15-12-2012 is attached as ANNEXURE-E.

6.    That the plaintiffs/appellants preferred an appeal against the Judgement & Decree dated 15-12-2012,which was illegally and without giving any cogent reasons has been dismissed by learned Addl.District Judge,Kasur vide Judgement & Decree dated 05-09-2013 as attached herewith as ANNEXURE-F.

7.    That the impugned Judgement & Decree dated 5.09.2013  and 25-12-2012 are illegal, suffers with material illegalities and irregularities, based upon jurisdictional defect, and are liable to be interfered with to the Appellate jurisdiction of this honourable court, inter-alia on the following :-

G   R   O   U   N   D   S

a.     That the impugned Judgements & Decrees of both the courts below are against the law, facts and circumstances of the case on record.

b.    That both the courts below did not consider the case of the appellants/plaintiffs in its true perspective and mis-read and mis-interpreted the material on record and illegally passed the impugned Judgements & Decrees.

c.     That the evidence produced by the appellants/plaintiffs were also ignored by the learned courts below,who fully supported the version of the appellants/plaintiffs but the learned trial court,on the basis of minor discrepencies,dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs.

d.     That while passing the impugned Judgement & Decree the learned courts below failed to appreciate that the respondant hasmiserable failed to produce cogent and worthy reliance evidence in order to prove his case.

e.     That the Judgements & Decrees, are erroneous, illegal, unlawful, null and void, without any cogent reason, arbitrary, against the facts and circumstances of the case and has not met of the principle laid down for providing of substantial justice.

f.       That plaintiffs have produced sufficient evidence and witnesses in order to prove the Agreement to sell dated 12-08-2003,  which were ignored by the learned courts below.

g.       That while passing the impugned Judgements & Decrees, the Learned Lower Courts below committed an error in appreciating that the possession of the land in question is with the appellants and respondent failed to prove that in what manner, the possession of the land is with the appellants and if the appellants snatched the same forcibly, then why he did not file the suit for possession against the appellants, which clearly proved that the appellants waere in possession on the basis of Agreement to sell.

h.     That while passing the impugned Judgements & Decrees, the Learned Courts below failed to appreciate that the Agreement to sell is a legal and genuine document which has been endorsed by the Notary Public and marginal witness are shown, who fully supported the version of appellants regarding execution of Agreement to sell and receiving of earnest money by the respondent.

i.        That it is a routine matter that while executing the agreement to sell, the purchasing party is endorsed his own witnesses but the Learned Courts below under the impression that no witness of respondent’s to sell, which is totally wrong.

j.        That both the learned courts below have committed material irregularities and have decided the suit and appeal with illegality and irregularities and has caused a great loss to the appellants/plaintiffs.

k.     That the learned court below has committed material irregularities and has decided the suit and appeal with illegally and irregularities and has caused a great loss to the appellants.

l.       That both the courts below have passed their respective Judgements & Decrees without proper application of mind and without proper appreciable of the record placed on the file; rather the same was passed in slipshod and hasty manner.

m. That both the courts below mis-interpreted and misconstrued the provisions of law and also failed to follow the dictums of Superior Courts and illegally passed their impugned Judgements & Decree against the plaintiffs/appellants.

n.    That the mis-interpretation of law and failure to follow the dictums of the Superior

 Courts, tantamount to exercise of     jurisdiction illegally, with material illegality, so the interference of this Honourable Court is called for.

o.    That if the impugned Judgements & Decrees are not set-aside, the appellants shall suffer an irreparable loss and injury.

p.     That the impugned Judgements & Decrees are contrary to provisions of law, as well as canons and principles of justice, so the same is no order in the eyes of law.

P   R   A   Y   E   R

It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that the instant second appeal may kindly be accepted and the impugned Judgements & Decrees passed by learned Courts below dated 5.09.2013 and 15-12-2012 may kindly be set-aside, in the interest of justice. It is further prayed that during the pendency of the titled second appeal, the operation of impugned Judgements & Decrees passed by learned  lower Courts below dated 5.09.2013 and 15-12-2012  may kindly be suspended and the possession of the appellants over the suit land may not be disturbed. Any other appropriate relief which this honourable court deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case may also be awarded.

APPELLANTS

THROUGH COUNSELS,

1.

2.

CERTIFICATE

Certified as per instructions that this is the first R.S.A on the subject in this honourable court.

ADVOCATES

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT ,LAHORE

R.S.A NO­­­­_______________________/2014

MEMO OF PARTIES

1. MUHAMMAD FAROOQ-E-AZAM S/O HASHMAL KHAN (Deceased)

2. TANVIR AHMAD (MINOR) S/O HASHMAL KHAN through his real brother MUHAMMAD FAROOQ-E-AZAM  

3.NUSRAT BIBI                            ]

4.RAZIA BIBI                                ] Daughters of Hashmal      

5.NASREEN BIBI                          ] khan

6.NASEEM BIBI                           ]

7.SHAMIM BIBI (MINOR)          [ Daughters of

8.RUQAYYA BIBI(MINOR)            HASHMAL KHAN]

Through their real brother Muhammad Farooq-e-Azam

9.FAJRO KHAN                            ]

10.MAHMOOD AHMAD KHAN] SONS OF KHAIRATI

11.IQBAL                                      ] KHAN

12.SHER MUHAMMAD              ]

13.UMAR DIN                              ]

14.RAQM-UD-DIN                       ] SONS OF CHANDAR

15.MUHAMMAD ARSHAD        ]KHAN

16.DIN MUHAAMMAD              ]

17.ABDUL RAZZAQ                      ]

All by caste Meo,residents of sarhali kalan.Tehsil & District Kasur.

APPELLANTS

VERSUS

KHURMAT KHAN SON OF GHUMAN KHAN (S/O Mst.CHANDO) CASTE MEO, R/O KHARA TEHSIL & DISTRICT, KASUR.

RESPONDENT

APPELLANTS THROUGH COUNSELS

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT ,LAHORE

R.S.A NO­­­­_______________________/2014

M. FAROOQ-E-AZAM ETC....VS....KHURMAT KHAN

 SECOND APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNED JUDGEMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY LOWER LEARNED APPELLATE COURT DATED 05-09-2013

AFFIDAVIT

OF MUHAMMAD FAROOQ-E-AZAM S/O HASHMAL KHAN, CASTE MEO,R/O RESIDENT OF SARHALI KALAN,TEHSIL & DISTRICT KASUR.

RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH,

1.     That the above named deponent do hereby solemnly declare and affirm as under:

That the averments as contained in the accompaying R.S.A are correct and true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

                                                                                                                      DEPONENT

VERIFICATION

Verified on oath at Lahore on 05-02-2014 that the contents of above affidavit are correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

                                                                                                                         DEPONENT

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT ,LAHORE

C.M_________________________/2014

R.S.A NO­­­­_______________________/2014

M. FAROOQ-E-AZAM ETC....VS....KHURMAT KHAN

SECOND APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNED JUDGEMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY LOWER LEARNED APPELLATE COURT DATED 05-09-2013

APPLICATIONUNDER SECTION 5 OF LIMITATION ACT FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE TITLED R.S.A

RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH,

1.    That the petitioners have filed the above titled R.S.A today in this honourable court in which, no date of hearing has yet been fixed.

2.    That after passing the above said Judgement & Decree dated 05-09-2013, the petitioners got the certified copy of the same and engaged a counsel for the filling of the titled R.S.A, who demanded huge professional fee for the preparation and filing the titled R.S.A which was not available with the petitioners,therefore,the petitioners, after a great strugle, arranged the said fee by borrowing money from their relatives, therefore, the R.S.A. could not be filed within the stipulated period of limitation.

3.    That the delay in filing the R.S.A. neither intentional nor wilful but was on account of facts and circumstances beyond the control of the petitioners.

4.    That the delay, if any ,in filing the R.S.A. is not condoned and the same is not decided on merits, the petitioners shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.                                 

                                                It is therefore, most humbly prayed that the instant application may kindly be accepted and the delay in filing the R.S.A. may kindly be ordered to be condoned and the same be decided on merits, in the interest of justice.

                                                                                                                               PETITIONERS

THROUGH COUNSELS,

1.

2,    

               DATED: 05-02-2014

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE.

C.M_________________________/2014

R.S.A NO­­­­_______________________/2014

M. FAROOQ-E-AZAM ETC....VS....KHURMAT KHAN

SECOND APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNED JUDGEMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY LOWER LEARNED APPELLATE COURT DATED 05-09-2013

APPLICATIONUNDER SECTION 5 OF LIMITATION ACT FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN  FILING THE TITLED R.S.A

AFFIDAVIT

OF MUHAMMAD FAROOQ-E-AZAM S/O HASHMAL KHAN, CASTE MEO,R/O RESIDENT OF SARHALI KALAN,TEHSIL & DISTRICT KASUR.

                        RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH,

1.    That I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly declare and affirm as under:

2.    That the petitioners have filed the above titled R.S.A. today in this honourable court, in which, no date of hearing has yet been fixed.

3.    That after passing the above said Judgement & Decree dated 5-09-2013, the petitioners got the certified copy of the same and engaged a counsel for the filling of the titled R.S.A, who demanded huge professional fee for the preparation and filing the titled R.S.A which was not available with the petitioners, therefore, the petitioners, after a great struggle, arranged the said fee by borrowing money from his relatives, therefore, the

R.S.A. could not filed within the stipulated period of limitation.

4.       That the delay in filing the R.S.A. neither intentional nor wilful but was on account of facts and circumstances beyond the control of the petitioners.

5.    That the delay, if any, in filing the R.S.A. is not condoned and the same is not decided on merits, the petitioners shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.

                                                                                                                                      DEPONENT

VERIFICATION

Verified on oath at Lahore on 05- 02-2014 that the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

                                                                                                                                                                 DEPONENT

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE.

C.M_________________________/2014

R.S.A NO­­­­_______________________/2014

M. FAROOQ-E-AZAM ETC....VS....KHURMAT KHAN

SECOND APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNED JUDGEMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY LOWER LEARNED APPELLATE COURT DATED 05-09-2013

APPLICATIONUNDER SECTION 5 OF LIMITATION ACT FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN  FILING THE TITLED R.S.A.

APPLICATION

UNDER SWECTION 151 C.P.C FOR SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION OF IMPUGNED JUDGEMENT & DECREE DATED 05-09-2013.

RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH,

1.    That the petitioners have filed the above titled R.S.A. with an aforesaid application u/s 5 of Limitation Act today in this honourable court in which no date of hearing has yet been fixed.

2.    That the contents of the main titled R.S.A. may kindly be read as an integral part of this application.

3.    That there is every likelihood of the success of main R.S.A. on the final date of hearing.

4.    That the balance of convenience also lies in favour of the petitioners.

5.    That if the operation of the impugned Judgement & Decree are not suspended, the petitioners shall suffer an irreparable loss and injury and titled main R.S.A. would also become in fructuous.

                                         It is most respectfully prayed that till the final decision of the titled R.S.A. the operation of the impugned judgement & Decree dated 5-9-2013 may kindly be suspended and the possession of the appellants over the suit land may not be disturbed.

                                                                                                                            

PETITIONERS

THROUGH COUNSELS,

1.

2.

DATED: 0   - 02-2014

    

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE.

    C.M_________________________ ___/2014

   R.S.A NO­­­­_______________________/2014

M. FAROOQ-E-AZAM ETC....VS....KHURMAT KHAN

SECOND APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNED JUDGEMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY LOWER LEARNED APPELLATE COURT DATED 05-09-2013

APPLICATIONUNDER SECTION 5 OF LIMITATION ACT FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN  FILING THE TITLED R.S.A.

APPLICATIONUNDER SWECTION 151 C.P.C FOR SUSPENSION OF THE OPERATION OF IMPUGNED JUDGEMENT & DECREE DATED 05-09-2013.

AFFIDAVIT

OF MUHAMMAD FAROOQ-E-AZAM S/O HASHMAL KHAN, CASTE MEO,R/O RESIDENT OF SARHALI KALAN,TEHSIL & DISTRICT KASUR.

RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH,

1.    That the above named deponent do hereby solemnly declare and affirm as under:

2.    That the appellants/petitioners have filed the above titled R.S.A. with tow aforesaid applications i.e. U/S 5 of Limitation Act & U/S151 C.P.C today in this honourable court in which no date of hearing has yet been fixed.

3.    That the contents of the main titled R.S.A. and both titled applications may kindly be read as an integral part of this/my aforesaid sworn affidavit.

That the averments as contained in the accompanying R.S.A  and both titled applications are correct and true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

                                                                                                                      DEPONENT

VERIFICATION

Verified on oath at Lahore on 05-02-2014 that the contents of above affidavit are correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

                                                                                                                         DEPONENT

                                                        

    

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT ,LAHORE

R.S.A NO­­­­_______________________/2014

MEMO OF PARTIES

1. MUHAMMAD FAROOQ-E-AZAM S/O HASHMAL KHAN (Deceased)

2. TANVIR AHMAD (MINOR) S/O HASHMAL KHAN through his real brother MUHAMMAD FAROOQ-E-AZAM  

3.NUSRAT BIBI                            ]

4.RAZIA BIBI                                ] Daughters of Hashmal      

5.NASREEN BIBI                          ] khan

6.NASEEM BIBI                           ]

7.SHAMIM BIBI (MINOR)          [ Daughters of

8.RUQAYYA BIBI(MINOR)            HASHMAL KHAN]

Through their real brother Muhammad Farooq-e-Azam

9.FAJRO KHAN                            ]

10.MAHMOOD AHMAD KHAN] SONS OF KHAIRATI

11.IQBAL                                      ] KHAN

12.SHER MUHAMMAD              ]

13.UMAR DIN                              ]

14.RAQM-UD-DIN                       ] SONS OF CHANDAR

15.MUHAMMAD ARSHAD        ]KHAN

16.DIN MUHAAMMAD              ]

17ABDUL RAZZAQ                      ]

All by caste Meo,residents of sarhali kalan.Tehsil & District Kasur.

APPELLANTS

VERSUS

KHURMAT KHAN SON OF GHUMAN KHAN (S/O Mst.CHANDO) CASTE MEO, R/O KHARA TEHSIL & DISTRICT, KASUR.

RESPONDENT

SECOND APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNED JUDGEMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY LOWER LEARNED APPELLATE COURT DATED 05-09-2013.

RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH,

1.    That the concise facts giving rise to the filing of the instant R.S.A. are that the appellants/plaintiffs filed a suit for possession through specific performance of Agreement to sell dated 12-08-2003 regarding the land measuring 02-kanals, 15 Marlas,being Khata no.42 Khatoni nos.89 to 91and 05-kanals, 03 Marlas being Khewat No.430,Khatoni Nos.687-686(total measuring 07 kanals, 18 Marlas),situated in Mouza Bhuja, Tehsil & District Kasur, in which,the plaintiffs/appellants contended thst the plaintiffs No.6 to 17 alongwith Hashmal khan entered into contract with Hashmal Khan on 12-08-2003 and paid earnest money of Rs.1,35,000/-as mentioned above.one week prior to filing of the suit, the plaintiffs asked the defendant that they had managed the remaining amount and they should got registered the deed in favour of the plaintiffs/appellants before Sub-Registrar, but the defendant refused to admit the same and stated that due to enhancement of price, he would not complete the agreement to sell for which he was time and again asked the defendant to fulfil his obligation but he denied to pay any heed on the request of the plaintiffs/appellants. Copy of plaint is attached herewith as ANNEXURE-A 

2.    That the defendant/respondent contested the suit by filing the written statement, wherein,he raised preliminary objections that the plaintiffs have no cause of action to file the suit and controverted the facts of the plaint and prayed for dismissal of the suit. Copy of written statement is attached as ANNEXURE-B

3.    That out divergent pleadings of the parties ,the learned trial court framed the following issues:

1.    Whether plaintiffs are entitled to possession through specific performance of agreement to sell dated 12-08-2003 in respect of land measuring 05-Kanal 03-Marla in Khata no.42,Khatoni no.89 to 91 total land measuring 07 Kanals,18 Marlas to the extent of transferred share, situated in Mouza Sirhali Kalan,Tehsil & district Kasur? OPP

2.    Whether sale consideration was Rs,1,40,000/-out of which Rs.1,355,000/- has been paid to defendant Rs.5000/- is to be paid? OPP

3.    Whether plaintiffs have no cause of action to file this suit? OPD        

4.    Whether impugned agreement to sell is fake forged and suit is, therefore, not maintainable? OPD

5.    Relief .

4.    That after framing the aforesaid issues, the learned trial court directed of both parties to adduce their oral as well as documentary evidence in order to prove their respective contentions. The plaintiff/appellant no. 12 appeared as PW-1,and produced Muhammad Tayyab as PW-2,Muhammad Asghar as PW-3.In the documentary evidence plaintiffs placed on record original agreement to sell as Ex.P1 and copy of Mutation No.1961 as Ex.P/2,Fard Jamabandi as Ex.P/3.The defendant/respondent himself appeared as DW-1 and produced Muhammad Islam as DW-2, Muhammad Rafique as DW-3.In documentary evidence,he produced attested copy of proceedings for redemption of mortgage evidence,Kasur as Ex.D.1,attested copy of record of rights for the year 2008-09 as Ex.D.2.Copies of evidence (Oral and Documentary) of both the parties are attached as ANNEXURE-C & D

5.    That the learned trial court without perusing the record of the case and without applying his judicious and independet mind.dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs/appellants vide Judgement & Decree dated 15-12-2012. Copy of Judgement & Decree dated 15-12-2012 is attached as ANNEXURE-E.

6.    That the plaintiffs/appellants preferred an appeal against the Judgement & Decree dated 15-12-2012,which was illegally and without giving any cogent reasons has been dismissed by learned Addl.District Judge,Kasur vide Judgement & Decree dated 05-09-2013 as attached herewith as ANNEXURE-F.

7.    That the impugned Judgement & Decree dated 5.09.2013  and 25-12-2012 are illegal, suffers with material illegalities and irregularities, based upon jurisdictional defect, and are liable to be interfered with to the Appellate jurisdiction of this honourable court, inter-alia on the following :-

G   R   O   U   N   D   S

a.     That the impugned Judgements & Decrees of both the courts below are against the law, facts and circumstances of the case on record.

b.    That both the courts below did not consider the case of the appellants/plaintiffs in its true perspective and mis-read and mis-interpreted the material on record and illegally passed the impugned Judgements & Decrees.

c.     That the evidence produced by the appellants/plaintiffs were also ignored by the learned courts below,who fully supported the version of the appellants/plaintiffs but the learned trial court,on the basis of minor discrepencies,dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs.

d.     That while passing the impugned Judgement & Decree the learned courts below failed to appreciate that the respondant hasmiserable failed to produce cogent and worthy reliance evidence in order to prove his case.

e.     That the Judgements & Decrees, are erroneous, illegal, unlawful, null and void, without any cogent reason, arbitrary, against the facts and circumstances of the case and has not met of the principle laid down for providing of substantial justice.

f.       That plaintiffs have produced sufficient evidence and witnesses in order to prove the Agreement to sell dated 12-08-2003,  which were ignored by the learned courts below.

g.       That while passing the impugned Judgements & Decrees, the Learned Lower Courts below committed an error in appreciating that the possession of the land in question is with the appellants and respondent failed to prove that in what manner, the possession of the land is with the appellants and if the appellants snatched the same forcibly, then why he did not file the suit for possession against the appellants, which clearly proved that the appellants waere in possession on the basis of Agreement to sell.

h.     That while passing the impugned Judgements & Decrees, the Learned Courts below failed to appreciate that the Agreement to sell is a legal and genuine document which has been endorsed by the Notary Public and marginal witness are shown, who fully supported the version of appellants regarding execution of Agreement to sell and receiving of earnest money by the respondent.

i.        That it is a routine matter that while executing the agreement to sell, the purchasing party is endorsed his own witnesses but the Learned Courts below under the impression that no witness of respondent’s to sell, which is totally wrong.

J.       That both the learned courts below have committed material irregularities and have decided the suit and appeal with illegality and irregularities and has caused a great loss to the appellants/plaintiffs.

K.    That the learned court below has committed material irregularities and has decided the suit and appeal with illegally and irregularities and has caused a great loss to the appellants.

L.     That both the courts below have passed their respective Judgements & Decrees without proper application of mind and without proper appreciable of the record placed on the file; rather the same was passed in slipshod and hasty manner.

M. That both the courts below mis-interpreted and misconstrued the provisions of law and also failed to follow the dictums of Superior Courts and illegally passed their impugned Judgements & Decree against the plaintiffs/appellants.

N.   That the mis-interpretation of law and failure to follow the dictums of the Superior

 Courts, tantamount to exercise of     jurisdiction illegally, with material illegality, so the interference of this Honourable Court is called for.

O.   That if the impugned Judgements & Decrees are not set-aside, the appellants shall suffer an irreparable loss and injury.

P.     That the impugned Judgements & Decrees are contrary to provisions of law, as well as canons and principles of justice, so the same is no order in the eyes of law.

P   R   A   Y   E   R

It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that the instant second appeal may kindly be accepted and the impugned Judgements & Decrees passed by learned Courts below dated 5.09.2013 and 15-12-2012 may kindly be set-aside, in the interest of justice. It is further prayed that during the pendency of the titled second appeal, the operation of impugned Judgements & Decrees passed by learned  lower Courts below dated 5.09.2013 and 15-12-2012  may kindly be suspended and the possession of the appellants over the suit land may not be disturbed. Any other appropriate relief which this honourable court deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case may also be awarded.

APPELLANTS

THROUGH COUNSELS,

1.

2.

CERTIFICATE

Certified as per instructions that this is the first R.S.A on the subject in this honourable court.

ADVOCATES