Find a Lawyer

FAZAL-UR-REHMAN AND OTHERS versus BEGUM SUGHRA HAQ

Section 62 Special Relief Act (I of 1877), Section 12 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), O XIII, R 2 The specific performance of the contract for the termination of the contract did not apply to the change of name of the applicable profession. After implementing the sale agreement, the plaintiff wrote a letter to the seller to execute the sale process in favor of his son, initially, the seller agreed to execute the sale in favor of the plaintiff. But instead sold the property to another person who had filed the case with the plaintiff. The trial court had ruled in his favor, whose verdict and order were upheld by the lower appellate court as well as the vendor through the High Court Plaintiff, and the seller was then no longer entitled to the original contract. This can be done because of its adolescence. Nothing was in the record to show that the son-plaintiff's son-in-law had a private contract to replace it as a substitute for the plaintiff's original contract, since the seller was not new to the party. Arrangements could not be made for the terms of the agreement between the claimant and the seller, even with regard to the seller, there was no negotiation of the contract since the defendants were not in the clear or compulsory case. The written statement requested the withdrawal of the agreement, it was believed that this defense was dismissed in view of the Twelfth, R2, the appeal of the CPC was dismissed. famous high court advocate from Karore Lalisan lawyer