A. XXXIX, Rr. 1 and 2 of the Special Relief Act (I of 1877), Sections 8 and 27 (b). The suit for the claimant of the sincere purchaser woven under the former discrimination. The claimant, with the application under O XXXXX, Rr. 1, 2, CPC files a lawsuit for possession by occupation, alleging that the defendant, who was the buyer of the disputed land, was abolishing the fish farms and alleging that he had acquired her Attempts to change the nature of the disputed property in order to reduce the price, the trial court dismissed the court's request. The plaintiff's appellate court also claimed on the appeal that the plaintiff was entitled to more than before, and he had not yet claimed to prove his case that he was a good buyer because of his claim. Can not be held hostage and may be deprived of such a buyer. Nothing was allowed to record the legitimate right to use and enjoy the property purchased by it, which shows that the fish farm constituted a substantial part of the value of the suit land and It was allegedly intended to be liquidated and would in fact reduce its value. Both lower courts have found that the three components of the injunction, the first fax case, the balance of convenience and irreparable harm to the plaintiff HC. Which has refused to interfere with the review. Scope
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
