Find a Lawyer

NAZIR AHMED BUTT versus MUHAMMAD HAYAT KHAN

Section 12 law ordered the specific performance of the contract to sell the evidence (Article 10 of 1984), Article 179 but the order was set aside for the execution of the contract, the evidence the plaintiff took the stand that the two Bargaining was done with the accused in the presence of minor witnesses, while the witnesses categorically denied the fact, saying that they were not present at the time of bargaining nor did the terms of the transaction be fixed in their presence. There was a material contradiction between the statements of witnesses regarding the date of purchase of the stamp paper and the agreement which was executed. The bank failed to prove to the record or any bank official that his claim that when the agreement was executed, the plaintiffs were drafted for a hefty sum, he made a material mistake on his part and Justified the assertion that this claim was false. The court was not open for an exception under section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. \ r \ n \ r \ n Pakistan, top advocate family court from Kot Addu lawyer