RASOOL BAKHSH NAICH versus SYED RASOOL BAKHSH SHAH
Transfer of Sections 8 and 27 (b) of the Property Act (IV of 1882), for the specific performance of a contract to sell two competing suits in the field in relation to section 41 suit land, an ex-seller wrote in his favor. The prosecution, the script, and its witnesses testified in support of the written agreement, accusing the contract and the delivery of its possession, and the other person in charge of an oral contract to sell in his favor and The measles test confirmed the validity of the country according to which the witness testified. There is a written contract to sell with the seller and the sale is considered. After that, no interruption of the seller's credibility can be made during cross-inspection by the vendor presenting the measles and examining the witnesses. Proof of delivery of possession was relieved by presenting such evidence The execution of the preliminary mock contract and the delivery of the property sought to prove that it was entitled to the sale after the sale of the suit. Neither confirmed nor denied information about such a prior written agreement, Ali was alleged to have neither been able to prove anything on the record to show that the latter had made any inquiry into such a written agreement or any suit on the suit land. do not have. The facts of the occupation of the suit on the suit landed the latter's vendor sufficient notice that he had a business right before and was charged under which the businessman had sued and subsequently filed by the shopkeeper. Matters
