Sections 15 and 17 were a substantial part of the agreement in the case of monetary compensation, with specific performance, with the plaintiff owning his minor brother's and two sisters' grant suits and selling the same to and on behalf of the plaintiff. Contracted. The suit was dismissed by the trial court and the lower appellate court for the specific performance of his brother and sisters' contract without authorization, as well as the trial court's dismissal of all claims related to further performance or compensation rights. Also upheld the terms of the court's justification. As stated in section 15 of the Special Relief Act, 1877, according to the letter and spirit, they were neither charged nor attracted to the strange facts and circumstances of the case. , Therefore, this restriction in section 17 of the Special Relief Act, 1877 cannot be contracted. In particular, the parties agreed that if the defendant failed to obtain the consent of the co-owners, the plaintiff would do so. The Supreme Court interferes with the High Court's decision to dismiss the appeal. Refused
