Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD IQBAL versus MST. SHARIFAN

For the specific performance of the contract, the Section 12 suit claimed that the defendant had agreed to sell the shop on the dispute, for a total consideration of Rs 16,000, 000, and out of that (the plaintiff). At the time of the agreement and paid Rs 2,000, 000 and Rs.400,000 on two different dates, the plaintiff alleged that the defendant had received a sum of Rs 7,000,000, despite the fact that the sale was done. It has been delayed in execution and instead demanded it pay a balance of Rs.1,00,000 in the notice of legal proceedings instead of execution of the sale process. The defendant acknowledged receipt of Rs.1,00,000, but it was claimed by the plaintiffs' court that the receipts of Rs. 2,000, and 4,000, 000 were refused, the accuracy of Rs. Two receipts of Rs. 4,000,000 were found to be false and the fake accused, who did not come to the court with clear hands, were tried for giving false evidence and tried for fraud. The statement of counsel for the plaintiff that the State Agen T had cheated the plaintiff, could not help to remove him from the crisis at the appellate stage unless otherwise such argument, which was not advanced in the lower courts. Was, could not be considered, the trial court provided the plaintiff with all the opportunity to provide evidence and the appellate court below gave her address. Based on the evidence on record, the plaintiff failed to indicate how the second appeal was sustained, the appeal was dismissed with costs \ r \ n \ r \ n famous supreme court advocate from Qambar Shahdatkot lawyer