Section 12 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), Section 42 (12) was an agreement between the parties in the suit for specific performance of the contract which showed that it was not a sale agreement but a Mortgage was a contract, the conclusions of the two below The courts also stated that there was no contract to sell the document, but the document involved in the mortgage case shows that the land in dispute was mortgaged through it. Once mortgage was always a mortgage, nothing was mentioned in this document, on the basis of which it can be said that both There was an agreement to sell the property, under which both documents correctly interpreted the correct document and rejected the case and appeal filed by the petitioner, nor any other legal point of view was raised by the applicant's lawyer. Nor was there any point to indicate misrepresentation or non-admissibility of evidence, leave of appeal was dismissed.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
