Section 12 Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Article 113 Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), Section 54 Sue for the specific performance of the oral sale agreement which is the plaintiff's plea that the parties sold the whole thing 16 years ago. After paying the price he contracted, after that he continued to occupy the land. And that 10 days before the lawsuit was filed, the defendant ultimately refused to perform his part of the contract. Refusal to refuse to wear a contract is denied. The oral contract cannot be deemed valid in law, where the terms and conditions were not satisfied, the claimant did not mention the correct date of the contract and the accompanying other necessary revenue record was shown to the claimant as a tenant record. I have nothing to show that after paying the full sale price for the defendant, why did the plaintiff postpone the sale case for 16 years and why not file? In time the suit became a time restriction, the suit was dismissed
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
