A. XXXIX, Rr 1 and 2 Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Section 12 Irreparable Damage The question of economic value Specific to the claimant's agreement with the application under A. XXXX, Rr 1, 2, CPC in connection with the dispute. Filed a claim for performance. The property is alleged to have paid Rs. 3 lakh as compensation and then the balance amount was also paid to the defendant on the basis that it was the plaintiff's daughter-in-law and The suit property has given it a gift. Her husband, with whom she had recently moved out, that she had not signed a sale agreement nor received any significant sums of money, was dismissed by the trial court's request for legal status. The documents were merely relied upon by the defendant in support of his claim that the agreements were specifically denied by the defendant due to the complete absence of proof of payment of Rs.7 million to the defendant. And it was not possible to acknowledge that the money was either paid in cash or through which there was no documentary evidence. Financial value was attached to the property and there was no question of irreparable harm that the property of the suit would be disposed of or disposed of, because of the suit, the lease was properly addressed by Penden's theory in the plaintiff's case. The trial court failed to identify any unlawful interference or material misconduct in the trial court's order. The High Court dismissed the first appeal to the extent that the observations made in this order were temporary in nature. And it should not be affected. Case Features
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
