The refusal to sell the specific performance of the Articles 12 and 22 agreement was upheld in favor of the same by the Court of Appeal filed by the plaintiff by the existing courts of fraud and fraud facts. Nothing but fraud, fraud, exploitation, and fraud, such as the so-called contract fraud, the plaintiff, who was a poor man, to order any lawsuit, such as the Special Relief Act, Provided under section 22 of 1877, certain performance was arbitrary and not obligatory to grant relief only because, it was permissible, the defendants were in an inappropriate position when the so-called contract was made, therefore, the courts approved. Under Jurisdiction, relief was required to be rejected rather than given to a single High Court. The following decisions and orders were passed by both the courts and the nomination was rejected.
