Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ASIF versus MIAN MUHAMMAD ZIA

Section 12 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), Specific Performance of Contract to Sell Section 96 The first appellant defendants claimed that the alleged contract for sale had been executed but that the purpose of its execution was to impose it. Refund Security The plaintiff in the plaintiff's constructive business did not agree to sell any of the suit property in favor of the plaintiff asking for a decree in the civil court for the specific performance of the plaintiff's contract of sale and for the purposes of proving the above. came. The contract presented the minor testimony of the said contract for sale, which affixed its signatures, saying the witness stated that the plaintiff paid the defendant a sum of Rs 12,90,000 because yesterday Considering the sale, there is an impression of Rs 16.50,000 before the trial court and a defendant whose witnesses specifically received the said amount in his presence and the signatures and thumbs on the said agreement. Syed Shahid further said that it was agreed between the parties that the remaining sale price of Rs 3,60,000 would be paid at the time of registration of the sale deadline. The statement stated that he had confirmed the agreement and had acknowledged his signature, saying that the witness had previously entered into all other details relating to the payment and receipt of money by the plaintiff and defendant in his presence. The testimony of the witness was confirmed. The sale was submitted by the plaintiff who confirmed the statements of two marginal witnesses, stating that the agreement had been written by him and that all the two marginal witnesses mentioned above and this special case property advocates from Leepa lawyer