Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN versus SOHRAB KHAN

Section 12 and 27 (b) West Pakistan Border Area Regulation, 1959 [MLR 9], paragraph 11 (iii) (b) suit for specific performance of the contract, discharge of general headquarters of the burden under section 27 (b). Impressions recorded by the courts under the Special Relief Act, 1877, in connection with the requests and evidence of the records recorded by the courts, the affected plaintiff entered into a contract with the defendant for the sale of the land and paid the latter. Permission from the Deputy Commissioner and during the same time the GHQ defendants transferred the land to the other persons under which the registered sale deed plaintiffs The specific performance of the contract against the shopkeepers / defendants is filed on the basis that the plaintiffs / shopkeepers were fully aware of the agreement between the plaintiffs and the shopkeepers. The plaintiff, who was guilty of breach of the terms of the contract and contacted him on several occasions, did not arrange for the balance amount. ts claim that they were worthless buyers without notice. This agreement, which was completely null and void in the absence of permission granted by GHQ under para 11 of the West Pakistan Border Area Regulations 1959, and the plaintiff did not even claim in the testimony that the defendants had entered into prior agreements. And since such an action could not be ordered under Section 27 (b) of the Special Relief Act, 1877, the trial court dismissed the case and subsequently filed the appeal through the lower appellate court. Was excluded, the denial of the contract agreement was not excluded from the written statements. Two sets of defendants presented the agreement to the court attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Mandi Faizabad lawyer