Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD GHAFOOR versus MST. MUNAWAR SHAHZADI

Article 12 In the present case, an arbitrary relief party, independently of the specific performance of the contract, contracted to sell the suit property in connection with the suit 17 years ago, to the extent that the plaintiff's recovery of the balance from the claimant to some extent is misleading. Another project was offered but the plaintiff who had only paid the dues on one excuse or the other due to lack of funds revealed that it was the claimant who failed to sign his contract. , Because he was not in control. Once in a lengthy litigation, when the plaintiff did not wish to collect the balance at any point, the sale agreement was written that in the case of extension of time, it was stated that the plaintiff had agreed to his No request signed by the sub-registrar was submitted in which the defendants were requested to execute the cell-deed validation. The sub-registrar, under the request, referred to the civil court, as a fake individual. It seemed that in the event of its endorsement merely wrapping up the contract, with the intention of retaining its claim, The witness was not brought civil allegations. The specific performance case is arbitrary, even if the contract is proved, the suit cannot be decided on the basis of equal consideration. The price of the real estate was increased several times, while the rupee value was facing market erosion, the defendant received a large sum of money from the claimant but hey did not issue notice to the claimant to seize it. Therefore, he was obliged to return the same amount, so the defendants were instructed to registration advocate from Pishin lawyer