Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD NAVEED versus TEEJAYS EXCLUSIVE (PVT.) LTD. THROUGH MANAGING DIRECTOR

Section 8 and 43 of the Contract Act (IX of 1872), section 55, issued a legal notice to the defendant within the stipulated period for non-payment of the balance of the contract by the plaintiff in the performance of the sale contract. For the plaintiff's failure to pay the plaintiff's contract and forfeiture, which before the balance was paid, the defendant had to take a commercialization of the suit plot from the Ministry of Works and Housing, which he failed to do so. Neither the evidence on the record nor the agreement showed that the plaintiff had mutually agreed to execute the agreement at the time of execution of the agreement. Before the transfer in favor of maatun suit the demands kmrslayzd plot. The claimant's removal of the clause proposed by the plaintiff for the commercialization of the suit plot was excluded, such deletion clauses of the contract could not have the specific performance of the claimant's failure to pay the balance pay period. His false insistence on commercializing the suit plot proved that he was not ready and willing to complete the sale transaction at the relevant time in accordance with the terms of the contract, therefore, in the specific performance of the contract. The suit was not excluded under the circumstances excluded \ r \ n law firms from Choppar Hatta lawyer