Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB, LAHORE

Sections 12, 27 (b) and 42 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) require the defendant to demand the specific performance of the contract for the sale of proof of contract whether the receipt of the sale of the dwarf fraud buyer's evidence for the price. Opposed this case. On the principle that he was a purchaser of value without the prior contract notice in favor of the plaintiffs and relied on the receipt of the sale in connection with the payment of the dues in his favor to the suit property owner, Which was allegedly issued prior to the agreement. The defendants of the sale did not say the contract in their favor, which was subsequently served on the basis of the receipt of the sale, on the contrary, the execution of the contract by the plaintiff was proved by the owner of the letter and the minor witness. Did not mention the execution of the agreement in favor of the defendants in their written statement and the defendant's alleged submission of the testimony as evidence by which the defendant allegedly presented the written statement was forfeited. And it was a fabricated document because the same charge was written by the owner's special counsel and the owner did not have any special The lawyer had refused to hang up. The defendants of the High Court correctly maintained both of the following courts. The appeal was denied by the Supreme Court immigration advocate from Zhob lawyer