Section 53 of the Special Relief Act (of 1877), interest in real estate in sections 12 and 20 was obtained through a contract to sell counterfeit transfers to defeat such interest, to enforce such interest. Right party jurisdiction, which was the subject owner. There was a sale agreement in connection with this plot with the prospective buyer, and then the confused buyer made another sale agreement with the claimant in connection with the subject plot, and the claimant paid a substantial portion of the total agreed consideration later. Plaintiff and prospective buyer cancel the sale agreement between them through the cancellation process, after which the defendant sold the plot to another party, the plaintiff suing the prospective buyer for a specific performance of his contract of sale. Filed, the trial court dismissed the case on the ground that the plaintiff's order was not entitled. The High Court agrees with the trial court on the issue of specific performance FIC performance but remanded the trial court to hear the matter on whether the prospective buyer was with the plaintiff. Was responsible for the breach of the sale agreement, the Trade Court and the High Court acted on the false premise that the defendant was the exclusive owner of the special plot. On the date of the sale agreement between the prospective buyer and the plaintiff, his interest in a prospective buyer under the sale agreement to avoid taking advantage of the immovable property with another person under a contract to sell it to another person. Under the contract, the prospective buyer is not available. On the execution of the sale agreement with the claimant, m
