Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD HANIF KHAN versus SHAH MUHAMMAD

For the performance of the contract of sale by the agent of Section 12, the suit contends that he paid the base amount through a check issued by his agent but the defendant claimed that the check was not breached. And the same was returned to the suit and the order was retained to present evidence that the controversial check was ever presented to the bank from where it was alleged that the original agent Was not returned, so if the agent had not been returned, he should have been present with the defendant but he, without He was not in possession of any explanation. It was not even established that at the required date of check inquiry, as per the question, the agent did not have any funds in his bank account which did not receive payment by the respondent, After acquiring the proprietary rights, the plaintiff was to perform it. It was acknowledged, the plaintiff was justified in finding the specific performance of the sale agreement against the defendant. There was no legal impairment in the decisions of the courts below; it sought to interfere with the jurisdiction of the review, So the request was dismissed power of attorney advocate Gilgit lawyer