Sections 12, 42 and 55 of the Transfer Property Act (IV of 1882), Section 573 Stamp Act (II of 1899), Sections 33, 35, 36 and 61 of the Registration Act (XVI of 1908), Section 50 of the Proviso 1 Treaty The admissibility option is not properly sealed under the unregistered contract for inspection examination and appliance promotion to maintain a specific performance partial performance declaration and in favor of selling the suit property and It not only seized the suit property, but also extended the construction, and the defendant filed a suit in the name of the plaintiff. Ryurtgy refused to enter, but the appellate court rejected the agreement valid. Was legally processed and signed by the defendant's predecessor, and was presented and exhibited in evidence without objection, and the disputed stay was referred to the plaintiff as part of the contract's performance. Gaya, which was a recognized fact that the plaintiff not only occupied the suit property but also promoted the same construction until the defendant's notice. Was an impatient buyer and has been against legitimate consideration since the day of the transaction. The approved features of the agreement attracted the provisions of section 53 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, which the appellate court had unlawfully withheld while the appellate court was to deal with the objections. Unregistration of the document was unaware of the provisions of Section 53A of the Transferred Property Act, 1882, and it was disregarded in proviso (1) of section 50 of the Registration Act, 1908, which made this person under previously unregistered documents. Provided in the possession of the property
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2015
