Section 12 suits The non-payment of the balance amount for the specific performance of the contract to sell the disputed plea The defendant claimed that the defendants had contracted to sell despite the receipt of a large sum of money, the defendants owned the property. The transfer denied that the claimant had failed to submit a balance sale. According to the court's directive, therefore, he was not entitled to the specific performance of the sale agreement; the stand taken by the defendants contradicted itself, as they took two opposing positions, the first being that they had The deal was canceled because the owner suit property had not signed the contract and asked them to cancel. And second, that the contract was non-existent and invalid because the plaintiff failed to offer them a balance sale on or before the last date, even though they were prepared to perform their contractual obligations in this way. The plaintiff's position proved that the defendants did not cancel the contract, but in fact they were ready to fulfill their contractual obligations. On the contrary, the plaintiff proved that he had sold the balance before the closing date. And there was no such contradiction between the claimants and the evidence, and their position was left unresolved when the defendant Was presented by To show that he was ready to consider a balance sale on or before the closing date, the non-negotiable contract was a contractual agreement between the parties and he was entitled to certain performance and not to deposit the money by the claimant. He did not refuse. Special Swift Relief a
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2015
