Section 12 suits the plaintiffs' specific performance of the contract of sale. The defendant was the owner of the suit land and one of the defendants himself and two others agreed to sell the suit to the plaintiff for consideration, the defendant further claimed that one of the defendants had paid the outstanding amount. After receiving the money, the sale agreement was executed and assured that all the defendants would process the sale deadline and the same would be registered on payment of the balance, but they refused to do the required work. One of the defendants was prosecuted, and the other two stated that they had never heard any of the defendants in their Was not given the option to contract on behalf of. The other four defendants claimed that one of the defendants had sold and agreed to them. The balance was found; execution of the sale agreement in their favor; and then it was stated that the defendant had been paid the balance and had executed the sale and registered it in his favor. And claimed that the seizure of the land was also conveyed to such ports / burglars, adding that their contract was premature and they were the trial court's legal buyers. The defendant had no option to sell the other two lands, but he contracted the sale himself and received a sum of twenty sums, the trial court ruled. Found that a defendant had on the first contract had already imported. The said purchasers (four defendants) were tried by the trial court for a refund of the dues by the defendants.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
