The trial court presented evidence to the defendant on the specific performance of the contract for sale and recovery of damages under Articles 12 and 19 of the Contract Act (IX of 1872), section 73 of the Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O XVII, R3 suit. Claims for specific performance but dismissed claim for damages Appellate High Court, barring the plaintiff from claiming that the defendant registered in favor of his nominee through the General Power of Attorney. Failed to execute the sale deed, which has been entrusted with the process of registered sale. The contractual penalty clause was liable to pay eleven times the sale price of the suit land, retaining the plaintiff's contradictory claimant's assertion that both specific performance and penalties could not be awarded to the plaintiff. Was entitled to compensation under Section 73 of the IPC. In the Act, 1872, if it established damages by the seller of the contract due to non-fulfillment of the contractual obligation, no such loss occurred through the plaintiff during the trial. In order to obtain compensation for damages caused by non-performance of the contract, the plaintiff had to give notice to the shopkeeper and demand compensation for breach of contract but not such notice was presented by the claimant or Then it can demand specific performance of the contract or enforce a penalty clause, if any, claiming the damages contained in the contract was caused by the cancellation of the power of attorney in favor of its nominee. But since the agreement was implemented, only three years after it was canceled, the penalty clause
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
