• ASSGINMENT: ASSIGNMENT IS THE

TRANSFER OF RIGHTS OR OBLIGATIONS

UNDER A CONTRACT.
• ASSIGNMENT IS A LEGAL TERM IN WHICH AN
THE GENERAL INDIVIDUAL, THE “ASSIGNOR,” TRANSFERS
RIGHTS, PROPERTY, OR OTHER BENEFITS TO
RULE ON ANOTHER KNOWN AS THE “ASSIGNEE.”

ASSGINMENT • FOR EXAMPLE, IF A (ASSIGNOR) CONTRACTS

WITH B (ASSIGNEE) TO TEACH B GUITAR FOR
$50, A CAN ASSIGN THIS CONTRACT TO C
(OBLIGOR).
Assignment by act of parties

• Assignment by act of parties takes place when the parties to a contract themselves make the assignment

• Under the following circumstances rights/obligations can not be assigned:

• If it is a contractual obligation/right involves personal skill or ability.
• If the contract expressly mentions that the contract shall be performed by the promisor only.

• Promisor remains liable to the promisee for proper performance after assigning the contract to someone else who is
competent enough to perform it.
• By Novation the promisor may transfer his liability to a third party with the consent of the promisee and the transferee.
Assignment by operation of law

• Assignment by operation of law takes place when the law intervenes.

• In case of death of any party the rights and obligation of the deceased party pass on to his legal
representatives.
• In case of insolvency of any party the rights and obligations of the insolvent party pass on to the
Official Receiver or Assignee.
Farouk Dossa vs
Qudsia Dossa
FACTS:

•Plaintiff: Muhammad Farouk Dossa

•Defendant 1: Muhammad Hussain Dossa’s wife
•Defendant 2: Muhammad Hussain Dossa’s
daughter
•Defendant 3: Muhammad Hussain Dossa’s
daughter
FACTS:

• Case of the plaintiff is that Mst. Sherbano had constructed a building comprising of four
flats known as `Falak Numa’.
• She gifted one flat each to her four sons.
• Muhammad Hussain Dossa transferred the ownership of his flat to his wife and daughters.
• In 1970 the Defendants handed over the possession to the plaintiff.
• Muhammad Hussain Dossa, by a letter made an offer to his brothers to sell the flat to
them, on behalf of the Defendants.
• The offer was accepted.
• The Defendants objected to the nomination of Ismail son of plaintiff as seller, kept quiet
when asked the Defendants to execute Sale‑Deed in his favor.
Letters
Letter 1

From Muhammad Hussain Dossa to Mr. Muhammad

Nisar Dossa,Mr. Muhammad Aziz Dossa, Mr.
Muhammad Farouk Dossa.

Date: 20th November, 1986.

Letter 2

From Muhammad Farouk Dossa and Muhammad

Aziz Dossa to the defendants

DATE: 1st December 1986

 Letter 3

From Defendants
Date: 4th
to the plaintiff
December 1986
and Aziz Dossa.
 Letter 4

From the plaintiff

Date: 8th December
and Aziz Dossa to
1986
the defendants.
 Letter 5

From plaintiff Date: 23rd

to the December
defendants 1986
 Letter 6

From the
Date:27th
defendants to
December 1986.
the plaintiff
 Letter 7

From the plaintiff

Date: 31st
and his brothers
December 1986
to the defendants
Letter 8

From Muhammad Hussain Dossa to

the plaintiff

Date: 4 January 1987

th
Arguments:

• Muhammad Hussain Dossa objected to the Sale‑Deed being executed in the name
of the nominee i.e. Muhammad Ismail son of Muhammad Farouk Dossa.
• Defendants’ counsel opposed that all the parties to the contract were not present in
the suit.
• Defendant had claimed that plaintiff acquired possession of the flat illegally/ by
force.
Judgement

• According to law the purchasers in a contract of sale can assign their interest in favour of
a third person at any time.
• He is seeking enforcement of contract in his name alone in his‑capacity as the assignee of
other co‑sharers. Muhammad Hussain Dossa had no objection and Aziz Dossa was
examined as a witness by the plaintiff.
• Plaintiff claimed that the possession was given to him by the defendant willingly. He also
allowed to store his furniture in the flat to which the defendant didn’t deny. Court held
that this seems more agreeable and ruled in favor of the plaintiff
• Court ordered the defendant to perform the sale deed and pay the costs of the suit as well.