Find a Lawyer

MST. SHAHANA KHAN versus MST. KHALIDA PARVEEN

Articles 8 and 12 of the Convention of Convention (10 of 1984), Arts 17 (2) and evidence of the agreement to seize the 117 suit The plaintiff filed a lawsuit on the refusal to vacate the suit which had been occupied as a licensee. Her husband filed a lawsuit. The suit, which was verbally gifted, was seized by the plaintiff in a partial performance of the settlement agreement in his favor, which was upheld by the appellate court, causing The plaintiff from the plaintiff refused to enforce the sale agreement to Burden. , Lying to the defendant to prove the execution of the contract, which she failed to exclude, was not a party to the agreement of the plaintiff's husband because the DW acknowledged that against the plaintiff's ion for certain performance. The suit against the filing of the claim was not filed for specific performance of the contract. A very important and relevant factor that could not be neglected was that the witnesses of the agreement were not examined. Thus, the defendant's husband did not have the right to alienate the suit house by gift, High Court dismisses request for review with costs family advocate from Mehar lawyer