Section 42 Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), Section 54 Law Evidence (10 of 1984), Article 100 Suit for Declaration of Limitations Oral Sales Mutual Scope The claim that he was the owner of the suit land and defective Spread. Unlawful, unlawful and factual was the plaintiff while the defendants claimed that they were the liable purchasers of the suit property, the suit was pronounced by the trial court, but was dismissed by the appellate court. The beneficiary will have to prove this transaction when it was challenged on the basis of fraud or misrepresentation, the defendants were obliged to prove the offer in connection with the sale of the land by the sellers. And as a result the shopkeepers accepted it. The defendant did not present evidence to establish the payment of consideration money other than the grant of possession, that the plaintiff had set up his case in relation to the sale of the suit land which was accepted by him. Cannot rely on variable content without support. Nothing was on record to prove that the defendants had failed. Transfer of possession was one of the most important factor in establishing legitimate sale of immovable property Defendants seized the land Defendants failed to establish possession exchange for sale The period of the plaintiffs will begin When the oral transaction was challenged on the basis of fraud or misrepresentation, there was nothing on record that the plaintiff knew of a significant change from the date of his affirmation in favor of a person. ?
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2015
