Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD BAKHSH versus ALLAH BAKHSH

Article 255 of the Contract Act, 1872 (V12 of 1912), Article 195 Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) of the Contracting Act, the plaintiff's right to enforce the contract was allotted to the State Land. Was on purpose. Provide proprietary rights to the defendants through special agreement on the fulfillment of the special terms, the rights are also recognized as the 1/3 shareholder of the plaintiff in the allotment and other rights thereafter, And demanded that defendants be entitled to it if they failed to meet such an assertion. Receive an order against them After the plaintiff receives such an order, the defendants' appeal and review against this decree were unsuccessful. That was without considering the agreement. And that plaintiff was not entitled to enforce this agreement because in the same section 19, the Government Land Colonization (Punjab) Act, 1912, the agreement between the parties revealed that it was not considered. Yes, the defendant recognized the shareholder's right to be the original shareholder. To the extent of 1/3, and also recognizing that in the pursuit of the same right, he was already in effective possession of the suit land because there had to be a claimant against his landlord, so there was no further argument. Not that the contract is a breach. Section 19 of Act V of 1912, was not pressed before the High Court. Thus the Supreme Court did not consider it necessary or appropriate to inspect the defendants. The tention dispute that the plaintiff agreed to pay his share of the government's obligations. As a result of which it was concluded. In fact, the leave to appeal immigration advocates contact from Bunner lawyer