Agreement- to- sell

The mere fact that the agreement-to-sell is a registered document or the fact that the original documents of plot in dispute were handed over to plaintiff-respondent do not prove the execution of agreement-to-sell. Liaqat Ali v. Abdul Aziz & 3 others 2001 SCR 146 (A)
The mere execution of an agreement-to-sell does not bestow any title until and unless further steps are taken in pursuance of the said agreement-to-sell. Liaqat Ali v. Abdul Aziz & 3 others 2001 SCR 146 (C)
In absence of proving the execution of the document agreement-to-sell and that some further steps in pursuance of the said agreement were taken in favour of respondent, he was not entitled to the decree. Liaqat Ali v. Abdul Aziz & 3 others 2001 SCR 146 (D)
Agreement to sell does not bestow the ownership — However, it confers a right to obtain the sale deed from the executants of the agreements — Possession is illegal to have been obtained from the executant and entered in the revenue record — As long as the respondent is in peaceful possession, he cannot be disturbed or get vacated by any un-lawful means — Respondent cannot be declared as owner by a decree of the civil Court — Court can direct protection of his possession and pass decree to that extent without declaring or deeming him owner. Hameedullah & 2 others v. Muhammad Hussain & 2 others 2005 SCR 368 (A)
Title — No declaration of title can be made on the basis of agreement-to-sell nor a decree of title can be granted in respect of shamilat-deh land unless all the co-owners are given chance to contest on merits. Walayat Khan v. Abdul Khaliq & 15 others 2006 SCR 92 (A)
Claim of petitioners that it (agreement-to-sell) does not confer any right, is right, that it itself does not confer any right, however, it confers a right to obtain the sale-deed from the executant of the agreement. Hameedullah & 2 others v. Muhammad Hussain & 2 others 2006 SCR 183 (A)
Agreement -to-sell does not bestow the ownership, hence respondent cannot be declared the owner of the land by way of a decree of the civil Court — However, the Court can grant the relief to which respondent is found entitled to after recording evidence and the respondent has sought the decree of perpetual injunction only claiming himself to be the owner of the land — He may not be owner, but he alleges to be in possession of land — Court can direct protection of his possession and pass decree to that extent without declaring or deeming him owner. Hameedullah & 2 others v. Muhammad Hussain & 2 others 2006 SCR 183 (B)
Agreement -to-sell does not create complete ownership for the purchaser and remains subject to some further performance under the Transfer of Property Act read with Specific Relief Act. Raja Muhammad Akram khan v. Azad Govt. & others 2006 SCR 214 (D)
Execution of — earnest money paid — Suit for specific performance — Execution of — Condition that if the vendor fails to execute the sale-deed then he will pay the double amount of the earnest money and if the vendee fails to get the land registered within the time fixed, then he will be deprived of his earnest money — No condition that in case of failure of the vendor, the vendee shall be entitled for decree for specific performance — Held: vendee was only entitled for receiving an amount double of the earnest money paid to the vendor. Muhammad Siddique v. Abdul Aziz Ratalvi & others 2015 SCR 705 (A) Walayat Khan & another vs. Muhammad Razzaq and others ( Civil Appeal No. 89/1998, decided on 23.4.1999) rel.
Agreement-to-sell confers no right in a party in the property — Such document can only be utilized for procuring another document. M. Siddique v. Abdul Aziz Ratalvi & others 2015 SCR 705 (B)
Agreement-to-sell does not create any right in favour of the plaintiff except the said document can only be used to procure a sale-deed. Ch. M. Hanif v. M Hanif & another 2016 SCR 1723 (B)
The agreement-to-sell only confers a right to obtain the sale-deed from the executant of the agreement — It does not create complete ownership in favour of the purchaser. Ch. Muhammad Hanif v. Muhammad Hanif & another 2016 SCR 1723 (D) 2006 SCR 2014 rel.
The agreement-to-sell does not create any right in favour of a party in the property and the same can only be utilized for procuring another document. Ch. Muhammad Hanif v. Muhammad Hanif & another 2016 SCR 1723 (E) 2015 SCR 705 rel.
Plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement-to-sell executed between the plaintiff and the defendant — it was not necessary for the plaintiff to seek the relief of possession. Muhammad Siddique Khan & another v. Zareen Khan 2016 SCR 1712 (E)
Agreement-to-Sell does not create any right or title — it can only be used to procure another document —when performance of agreement-to-sell shall be made the document, i.e. sale-deed will confer a right upon the vendee — At the stage of execution of agreement-to-sell no right, title or interest was created — there was no need to seek the relief of possession of the property. Muhammad Siddique Khan & another v. Zareen Khan 2016 SCR 1712 (F)
— The agreement-to-sell, though, does not create any right in the property but it clothes the plaintiff with a right to obtain another document and after execution of the agreement-to-sell, transfer of land to any other person is mala fide and without lawful authority. Nazir Hussain Shah & others v. Muhammad Saeed Shah 2017 SCR 1593 (D)
—the prayer for grant of decree as owner on the basis ofagreement-to-sell in the light of the statutory provisions as well as principle of law enunciated by this Court cannot be granted. Muhammad Ayub vs Ali Zaffar & others 2018 SCR 20 (E)