On the basis of the alleged sale transaction entered into between the parties in Articles 54 and 54, the suit for declaration and permanent injunction, without mentioning a date and year, can not be found in any declaration such as the circumstances. I did not comply with the law of the suit and in the absence of any details of the date of sale, consideration of the sale and other details of the sale in the claim, even if these allegations are proved, the decree passed in favor of the plaintiff. Cannot, whenever, the plaintiff ask for a declaration. The title, in real estate, was his legal obligation to prioritize his claim on the basis of a legitimate title deed. In the absence of this, no decree could be granted in which no title was designated as support for the property owners. Defendants failed to mention their claim, but also the date of the sale transaction, which was illogical to a legitimate sale, and readily concluded that there was no sale transaction between the parties. Happened and no sale was considered by the defendants. It has been claimed that the deferred sale was retained, notwithstanding any illegal or irregular or judicial error, along with entries made by both courts and decrees in daily routine finding. ?
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2012
