Find a Lawyer

ARAB GUL versus PATHANA

Section 12 Transfer of Property Act (I82 of I82), section 41 suit for special performance of the sale agreement but an appeal in the appeal, which was the original allotment of the suit land, was in agreement with the plaintiff's predecessor. Which is a lot. After granting the property rights, the question was later agreed to be sold but the full consideration of the land was paid by the plaintiff, but after the grant of the property rights, the plaintiff refused to convey the land to the plaintiffs, The suit was contested by both the defendant / defendant and the two to achieve the specific performance of the contracts. The Transfer Appellate Court finding that the effective contracts and invoices were not proven in accordance with the law was not tenable because the defendant / seller stated in their written statement that the documents were confessional and the testimony mentioned by the witnesses Regular proof of documentation is not required. The plaintiffs 'testimony in the case was strong evidence in support of their case clutches, that the plaintiffs' possession of the suit land was established at all material times by the relevant Patwari's Repeat Daily and it was stated that the plaintiffs in the suit land. The notice was also framed after the claim filed by and the suit property was not proved after that. His power of attorney was not presented on record by the slightest testimony of the subsequent contract and even the seller's general attorney's recovery, the alleged execution of the post-sale pledge, or the claims of the subsequent shopkeeper. That he deserves protection. To prove the allegation of collusion between the defendants and the defendant / seller famous lower court advocate from Bahawalnagar lawyer