The Special Relief Act, 1877, for the specific performance of the claimant's sale contract, the defendants alleged that the sale agreement in the dispute was executed under fraud and misrepresentation. The defendant failed to prove his claim and The plaintiff's evidence of irregularity also fails to establish this sale agreement was terminated by the plaintiff when the plaintiff claimed the defendant after legally seizing it for payment. It was held that the defendant was timely barred from stopping the case, but the plaintiff did not have any The burden of proving the plaintiff's case was not excluded. Based on the evidence presented, the contract was entitled to certain performance of the sale
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
