Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AMIN versus MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE

The decree passed in favor of the plaintiff by the trial court below was postponed for the specific performance of the Appellate Court contract for sale of the Appeal Court, Section 144 of the Special Relief Act of 1908 (Section I of 1877), and the trial court I have decided to file a remand case. Following the trial, after the trial, legal representatives of the two vendors / defendants filed a petition for restitution against the right under which the property was given to the claimant / seller. The trial court accepted the request of the legal representatives of the shopkeepers for a reversal in the appeal that the property was disputed by two vendors and one of them admitted that it sold its share to the seller appellate court. Under which the amendment order passed in the trial court's application was issued. Defendants / vendors allow application to the extent of the property owned by the plaintiff admin The dispute was a matter with the vendor The court ruled that the possession of the property in dispute will remain with the shopkeeper as he or she will rent the property for the disputed property. In view of the price, the competing seller will be part of the seller and in this case a part of the shopkeeper, in the case of default, he will be responsible for handing over the entire property to the defendants. female advocates from Domeli lawyer