A. VIII, R2 Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), failed to substantiate the duration of the Section 12 suit agreement for the recovery of money, for the receipt of the money filed by the plaintiff / vendor. Scope suit filed by the accused / seller since the sale of the land was decided in its favor. The appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal filed by the seller. The seller believed that according to the contract the entire suit was given to the respondent / seller of the land and given to such seller. In order to confirm the change, the shopkeeper was obliged to pay the remaining sales within the stipulated period so that the vendor's validity was not enforceable as the contract showed possession of the entire land. Was given to the seller but in reality such phrases used in the process were not compiled in fact and letter and spirit and the vendor itself moved the request to determine its land boundary and its boundaries. Income tax for the defendant / vendor will be given full control over the suit land if the vendor gives the entire property to the shopkeeper. What was the purpose of requesting this limitation by the vendor then the bidder? The relevant applicant did not pay the portion of the contract, but at the time of the contract the entire suitor was not in possession of the property to supply it, so he was responsible for returning the money received according to the contract. Was deleted
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2015
