Claims 12, 42 and 54 of the suit for declaration, specific performance and permanent injunction for the injunction against the plaintiff, who was the tenant of the suit property, claimed that the deceased was in a contract to purchase the suit property with his landlord / landlord. Consider the legal legacy of the owner of the dispute in the settlement agreement was denied the sale agreement between the deceased father and the plaintiff in the stipulated period in order to facilitate its preparation and The balance sale was not paid for and agreed to. Regarding the alleged transaction, if in all cases the plaintiff had prayed for an illegal injunction and the defendant was instructed not to evict the plaintiff from the suit property, the contract to sell the matter was clear. Was not decided as it was clear that the plaintiff was entitled to possession. In his capacity as a tenant only, the suit was according to the property and he was obliged to pay the monthly rent after the sale of constructive possession to the claimant when the suit was occupied by the claimant, in the event of his merits only. The tenant was or was not entitled to occupy the premises of the suit under the disputed agreement, under the circumstances of the seller's contract of sale, however, in this case the plaintiff would not refuse to take possession of the tenant's position. , Which had to be regulated by relevant laws. Due to the default commitments in payment of rent, the owners could not be seized to evict the plaintiff when the plaintiff had the ability to occupy the tenant's request for the plaintiff.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011
