A. VIII, R11 Registration Act (XVI of 1908), Section 17 Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), Section 54 The dismissal of the plaintiff's contentious argument was essentially a contract of sale under section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908. ? That the plaintiff suffered a defect that could not be cured and the same was rejected The valid contract for the sale of immovable property was not re-identifiable only because such a document Receipts of any interest payments or any portion of the purchase money, section 54 of the Transfer Property Act, 1882, which provided that the payment of the price paid or the promised portion or There was a transfer of ownership in exchange for a portion of the price but the more considered real estate sale agreement was a contract. I should have sold the property on terms agreed between the parties. However, it did not, itself, generate any interest in, or receive any value from, such a property, so it would not require the registration of the sale contract because it is a document, which itself. Didn't create a title, it just created. An agreement was reached between the parties that the seller would transfer the property to the seller through the registration of documents Ground emphasized that OVII was not sufficient or durable for the plaintiff's rejection under R 11 CPC.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011
