Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ARIF versus MAHMOOD ALI

In Section 12 and 42 of the Shahadat (10 of 1984), Article 79, for the specific performance of the declaration and sale agreement of the suit, the suit land in which the property was transferred, in which date the defendant and the rights holder Was executed on the registered sale deed on the right. The plaintiffs claimed that the transfer of the suit land initially led to a sale agreement in their favor in connection with the suit land, after receiving the lost money, the plaintiffs also claimed that they had the suit land. Was occupied. In the case of the sale time that was allegedly executed by the transferor in favor of the defendant, the defendants were taken notice that the issue of their interest was the plaintiff's request that the defendant value valuable consideration without notice of the defendant. Cannot claim to be a substantial buyer of the suit for consideration. Regarding the plaintiffs who had previously purchased the plaintiffs' court suit for plaintiff's dismissed suit, which was alleged by the plaintiffs, the plaintiff's sale agreement was viewed by two minor witnesses, but Only one appeared before the court and no explanation was given for not presenting the other minor testimony, which was not complied with, the requirements of Article-79 of the law, testimony, 1984, 1984, sale agreement Cannot be relied upon because the witness presented as a witness was not even qualified as a minor witness The witness was in several years ago and the complainant's statement and alleged agreement relating to the implementation of the two cases was the purchase agreement to buy another stamp paper attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Mohen Jo Daro lawyer