Find a Lawyer

MALIK MUHAMMAD YASEEN versus SYED RAZA HYDER

Section 12 of the Contract Act (IX of 1872), Section 55 Swift provided the required documentation to the plaintiff before the specified date for the completion of the sale, for the specific performance of the contract sales contract that was the essence of the contract at that time. Had agreed to do. The parties had to decide whether to consent to their conduct or otherwise deal with the contract on the day when the plaintiff was informed by the plaintiff that such documents were on record Nothing was found that the plaintiff presented such documents or the plaintiff had an opportunity to be satisfied that the defendant had obtained such documents at the time the contract was not the essence. The suit was ordered under the circumstances. \ R \ n

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014

• ZARDULLAH KHAN v. Mst. RUQIYYA HANIF MANIAR 2014 YLR 1840
• Meer MUHAMMAD SHAFIQ v. JAMIA MASJID HANFIA 2014 YLR 1853
• MUHAMMAD ASIM v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Chairman Federal Board of Revenue 2014 PTD 1897
• MUHAMMAD ESSA GODIL v. Mst. SITARA JAMIL 2014 YLR 1901
• SAEED KHAN v. State 2014 YLR 1944
• MUHAMMAD SHAFIQ v. MUHAMMAD SULEMAN JAMEEL 2014 YLR 1960
• SHUJABAD AGRO INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD. v. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS 2014 PTD 1963
• MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN SHAH v. State 2014 YLR 1984

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2014 →

top civil advocates from Chitral lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes