Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD KHAN versus SALEHUN MUHAMMAD

Delay for the specific performance of the sale contract in Section 12 Arbitration Act (X of 1940), Section 14 Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Section 14 Civil Procedure Code (VV 1908), O VII, R 6 suit. The source agreed to waive the contract and the seller's property in favor of the plaintiff was in possession of the plaintiff's property under the contract of sale, according to the agreement, seriously, the balance up to 20 3 1977 or before. Was obliged to pay the sum of money and to finalize the matter, before the date of the target under section 14 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, to obtain the award for the rule of the court. Vastu was resolved was which was born in the dispute concerning the agreement through arbitration and the arbitrators award was announced by the claimant. , Defended the application of the legal and factual premises, but said that the application was dismissed by the trial court, the appellate court and even the high court, but that the claim was filed by the Supreme Court on 10 7 1988 and the plaintiff 8 8 1988 The suit was filed for specific performance of the contract, due to the limitation of the suit it was argued that the lawsuit was disappointed almost ten years after the date of its performance. And was bound to dismiss the application under section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1908, and the Court of Arbitration Act 1 to fulfill the delay in his absence. 940 could not express the delay between the parties arising out of the petition which started on 31 7 1977. On 7th 1988, at the level of the Supreme Court and the plaintiff was pursuing the matter, and during that period the plaintiff had a specific contractual worker tax advocates from Khairpur Nathan Shah lawyer