SYED ANWAR ADIL SHAH versus SYED QAMAR-UZ-ZAMAN SHAH
The ACL, R1 Special Relief Act (of 1877), the Section 12 suit for the specific performance of the contract, was in use in the property in dispute in 2006 and therefore filed a specific performance claim of the contract and permanent injunction. The defendant had failed. The trial court granted the request for processing of the petition filed by the cell-dead defendant under 0 DL, R1, CPC for the appointment of the recipient in connection with the disputed property and directed the recipient to direct the recipient. Determined to maintain all accounts under the appropriate information. The Court of Appeal filed an appeal which was allowed by the appellate court and the application for appointment of the recipient was dismissed. Legitimate disputed property has been in use by the plaintiff since 2006 and it will not be easy and easy to evict the plaintiff from any other immovable property. On the basis of non-disputed facts and mainly some vague allegations, no material was brought on record to substantiate the allegations The defendant stated in his letter to prove that the plaintiff was able to establish Was unsuccessful in claiming that the disputed property, which was subsequently given to the claimant after the sale agreement, is in danger of being lost, lost or has a strong risk of being exposed. The property excludes allegations that some trees are being cut down or that the plaintiff is setting up a playground for children on disputed property in which there is no evidence or no material was presented or before the trial court. Or the High Court dismissed the petition and said that the judicial decision between the parties
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011
