For the specific performance of the Arts 59 and 72 Stamp Act (II of 1899), Sections 33 and 35 Registration Act (XVI of 1908), Section 17 Special Relief Act (I of 1877), Sections 12 and 42, Contract and Declaration Document , Opinion of Opinion Proof Handwriting Unclaimed document claims that his grandfather sold the question and the sale agreement was executed in favor of the sale on 11 11 1999 The agreement was an unregistered document, so the trial court sent it to the writing expert for comment. The handwriting expert said that the signatures on the contract that were filed by the claimants were dismissed by the trial court's trial court accuracy act, for the expert's opinion. The trial court's decision to declare such action was rational, logical, legal and its affirmative approach to resolving legal complications was based on a document claiming to be worth Rs.25 million, which was not registered, Therefore, he was unable to create any rights in the property and no order was granted on such illegal and unverified document. The motion could not be approved in view of section 35 of the Stamp Act, 1899, the contract for sale was inadmissible and could be construed as per the provisions of this section. Plaintiffs' claims, 33 of the Stamp Act, 1899, were collected, fraudulent, baseless and without cause the plaintiff failed to prove its case and the trial court rightly dismissed the High Court in exercising its jurisdiction. And the decision passed by the trial court was an appeal. Lately
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2012
