Find a Lawyer

ABDUL AZIZ versus MUHAMMAD NASIR

The conclusions of the two courts below for the specific performance of a Section 12 agreement cannot be determined by defining the evidence in the appeal without any error of law. In this case, where the agreement was proved, the arbitrator was to be treated with justice and arbitrarily the plaintiff failed to identify any error in the judgment and the appellate court also found that the plaintiff had Specific performance was not entitled to arbitrary relief. Under the circumstances

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014

• MUHAMMAD NASEEM AHMAD v. Mst. SHAMA KHATOON 2014 PLD 290
• FIRST DAWOOD INVESTMENT BANK LIMITED v. HOUSE BUILDING FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED 2014 CLD 292
• Mrs. SHABANA ANJUM v. MUHAMMAD GULZAR 2014 PLD 295
• MUHAMMAD ASHRAF v. PHILIP JAVED 2014 MLD 297
• PIZZA PIPER v. SINDH LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 2014 PLC 300
• MUHAMMAD USMAN v. MUHAMMAD NASEEM 2014 PLD 302
• GHULAM MUHAMMAD v. State 2014 YLR 303
• MUHAMMAD HANIF v. GOVERNMENT OF SINDH through Secretary, Education Department 2014 PLC(CS) 304

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2014 →

online advocate from Kot Radha Kishan lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes