MUHAMMAD WAQAS RAFI BHATTI versus MST. NASEEM RAHAT
O XXIII, R 1 (3) O II, R 2, CPC and Section 11 Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Section 12 Contract Act (IX of 1872), Section 55 Suit for sale for specific performance of the contract Regardless of the time, the essence of the contract was to pay the rest of the compensation on a fixed date, so the time was the essence of the agreement. I didn't decide. Such findings will not lead to misreading or reading of evidence and any other material available on record or misconception of facts, open defects of law, excessive or jurisdictional misuse, arbitrary use of force or where unreasonable views were taken Was the result. Arrange the remaining consideration and serve as part of the agreement The two courts below properly examined the evidence that the plaintiff withdrew the earlier case for permanent injunction. Filing an existing lawsuit for specific performance that was not prohibited by O XXIII, R 1 (3), CPC or O II, R 2, revoked the circumstances in which the Judiciary CPC rules were not applicable. Gone
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
