Find a Lawyer

ALLAH DITTA versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF

Sections 12 and 27 (b) are allotted scope suit to the defendant / alte for the specific performance of the contract to sell the land without notice to the Colonization (Punjab) Act (V \ 1912), section 19. Which had not yet been achieved. Proprietary rights The plaintiff / defendant contracted the sale of the suit land with the defendant / alti on 26 4 1967 and paid the whole of the sale to the latter. Defendant / Allottee, after acquiring the proprietary rights as per the terms of the agreement on 18 4 1970, moved the defendant / alte, other persons (defendants / appellants) under registered sale deadline 22 4 1970. , Plaintiff / Defendant sued Plaintiffs, Sellers and Sellers did not deny execution of the Sale Agreement in favor of Plaintiff but they asserted that the section was infringed. 19 of the colonies of the Government Land (Punjab) Act, 1912, the sale contract was declared void as the trial court decided the case on this basis. Or that the defendants / vendors had no good buyer without notice, the appeal was dismissed Appellate Court also dismissed by the plaintiff. The sale agreement with the defendant / aloty and the sale of the latter was proved and established on the simplicity of the record agreement with the payment of the sale and the delivery of the occupation and it was a colony of the Government Land (Punjab). The evil of section 19 was not to be attracted. Act, 1912 The plaintiffs / shopkeepers say they were deliberate buyers without notice, contradicting the testimony of the affidavit executed by the defendant / alot and the plaintiff. immigration advocates phone number from Narang Mandi lawyer