Find a Lawyer

ARBAB ALI versus NOOR BAKHSH

Section 12 law evidence (10 of 1984), Article 79 Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), Section 573 a Civil Procedure Code (VV 1908), O VIII, R1 contract sale, contract, sale by buyer Proof of non-signing of the contract In a written statement, the labeling contract for the sale of the counterfeiters agreed that the defendants had completed and final consideration and that the possession had been handed over to them and the defendants had signed the agreement. Denied the execution and also described it as a forgery. In its written statement, the trial court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction. The appellate court rejected the appeal that the contract was not signed by the buyer and it is on this basis is not acceptable to create the contract by the buyer. To prove the authenticated document, the conditions laid down by the law were met because both witnesses were presented and acknowledged their implementation. In his presence, the acquisition of the contract appellate court was based on a misunderstanding of the law and lack of evidence on record, and the contract proved to be enforceable, and its terms and conditions clearly showed that the contract was for real estate by the buyer. Was accepted under the transfer agreement. The provisions of Section 53A of the Transfer Property Act, 1882 only required that the transfer be made by or on behalf of it, the law did not require that the contract be signed by the buyer labeling as the written statement was forged. Making was not enough. Since the written statement was not evidence in the decisions of the law and passed by the courts below how to become a advocate from Samma Satta lawyer