Find a Lawyer

M.Z. KHAN versus AZIZ-UD-DIN AHMAD KHAN

This charge was filed on the application of the Association's Contracting Executive in connection with the transfer of property, Section 16 (XIV) of the Immovable Property and Displaced Persons Act (XIV of 1975), Section 2 (2). The alleged execution was the result of ineffective influence. The deal alleged that he was suffering from a mental illness and started living with his father-in-law who used to take advantage of his mental illness to get some of his signed documents and was processed on record. His father-in-law had obtained the PTO and PTD. He said that based on the documents he had obtained from them under the influence of the contract, the executor of the contract had tried to deal with them on the basis of the agreement that the execution of the contract was against them. The allegation of illicit influence was not proven to prevent accusations of illicit influence. The settlement authority did not make any statement in this regard, and its prolonged silence in this case also gave rise to negative indications. Is the exact nature of the effect, the manner of use of the influence, the unfair advantage obtained by the other party, This had to be proven with caution, because the summary of ineffective influence was that a person was compelled to act against his will, but because of such influence, if he himself left to decide. He would have refused to do so lawer from fb area from Harnai lawyer