Section 8, 42 and 54 Civil Code of Conduct (v. 1908), O. VI, R 4 Land, suit for lease, declaration and order fraud, details of fraud, not to mention the plaintiff owning the suit land Claiming that he did not sell the land to the plaintiff who committed and committed fraud. The trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiff. There is no fraudulent description and no history of why the plaintiff failed to explain when he was on the record of fraud, why the defendant had been filing rent with the authorities since a separate year. The plaintiff's request that the lease be non-transferable was contrary to the lease agreement, which allowed the authorities to transfer the rights to the leasehold was not in accordance with the basis of the plaintiff's case. The plaintiff on the lease agreement failed to prove his fraud case and if no fraud case was established, the plaintiff's case on counterfeiting failed as well, although the plaintiff refused to sign the document, he waived the transfer fee. Deposit, partial payment, return of security deposit or the fact that the defendant had submitted the rent for five years or the plaintiff had failed to deal with the fraud and thus was used by the High Court. Didn't deserve to be. With regard to the jurisdiction of the appeal, the trial court dismissed the judgment and the judgment and the case filed by the plaintiff was dismissed, appeal was allowed in the situation
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012
