ABDUL HAFEEZ versus PAKISTAN DEFENCE OFFICERS HOUSING AUTHORITY
Section 12 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), A XXIII, R 3 Law Reform Ordinance (XII of 1972), Section 3 suit promulgated a sale agreement by the Enforcement Claimant regarding the consent of the High Court to the specific performance of the sale contract. Specific performance lawsuit filed. The Housing Authority, on the basis of a compromise between the parties, ruled that the plaintiff's refusal to transfer the plot meant that there was no title in the name of the defendant, which the High Court Single Judge directed to the Housing Authority. Denied. The validity of the transfer case in favor of the plaintiff was agreed on the basis of a compromise between the parties and between them. It was essentially an agreement between the parties that the court had obtained a seal from the seal in a contract, and even after such an agreement, his term with the seal of the court was terminated. ? Almost all the components of a contract, therefore, can be set aside on any ground that could strike a deal because only the parties to the fraudulent, misleading, or misrepresenting agreement have the terms and conditions Were bound by the agreement, while the court could not do so by enforcing the terms and conditions of the agreement between the parties to the agreement, even though the agreement with such agreement was terminated. The judgment of the court and the consent of the court shall compel a third party to comply with it unless the decision and the relationship between such third party are established. Order passed by a single judge
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2015
