Find a Lawyer

ATA MUHAMMAD versus HIDAYAT ALI

For the specific performance of the Section 12 suit for sale agreement, the plaintiff claimed that the defendant had agreed to sell the suit land in favor of the plaintiff by executing the sale agreement and the defendant received money from the plaintiff. Because the plaintiff as a plaintiff refused to execute the alleged sale agreement. Receiving the balance in favor of the plaintiff and stating that the sale contract was a result of the fraud and that he had to pay the burden on the plaintiff to prove the execution of the sale agreement in his favor, Removal because he failed to submit not only the author of the said contract, but also the stamp vendor, the stamp vendor's registrar and the identity of the person from whom the stampers filed the proof of this claim by the claimant. The witnesses presented were of interest because they had close relationships. The defendant, who had a dispute with the defendant's land and tube well, said that the witness had a deep connection with the plaintiff's version that the defendant allegedly had a sale agreement that was the result of fraud. Was, in those cases, unable to prove the execution of the sale agreement in his favor, the plaintiff also failed to produce a receipt in connection with the payment of the twenty sums received. None of the witnesses, by the defendant, had clearly stated that the amount of money owed or counted in respect of the amount owed in their presence was due to the fact that the plaintiff did not have any claim from the defendant. Even the money was not paid, the trial court was fully established power of attorney advocate Yazman Mandi lawyer