Contract Act 1872

Section 32 : Enforcement of contracts contingent is an event happening   2021  PLD  453   LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE ABDUL WAHEED VS ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE 62(f)—Contract Act (IX of 1872) Ss. 32 & 56—Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XXXIX Rr. 1 & 2—Constitution of Pakistan Art. 199—Constitutional petition—Contract of “license” to use premises—Impracticability or frustration of […]

Section 31 : Contingent contract   2017  YLR  495   LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE GHULAM MUHAMMAD VS MEMBER (JUDICIAL-III) BOARD OF REVENUE PUNJAB, LAHORE Ss. 31, 32 & 202—Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 54—Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act (V of 1912), S. 19—Suit for permanent injunction—General power of attorney—Agreement to sell by the attorney—Transfer of property

Section 28 : Agreement in restraint of legal proceedings void    2022  MLD  1363   LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE MUHAMMAD KHALID VS ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE S.12—Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. VII, R.11—Contract Act (IX of 1872), Ss.11 & 28—Suit for specific performance—Rejection of plaint—Agreements in restraint of legal proceedings void—Competence of minors to contract—Scope—Petitioners assailed the concurrent

Section 25 : Agreement without consideration void, unless it in writing and registered, or is a promise to compensate for something done    2021  CLC  1668   LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE PAHAL KHAN (DECEASED) VS MUHAMMAD IQBAL (DECEASED) Ss.42 & 12—Contract Act (IX of 1872), Ss. 2(d), 25 & 22—Suit for declaration—Specific performance of agreement to sell—Promise for the

Section 23 : What consideration and objects are lawful or what not    2004  CLD  1213   LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Messrs ATLAS LEASE LTD. VS Messrs PUNJAB STEELS (PVT.) LTD. –S.10—Contract Act (IX., of 1872), Ss.23 & 74—Recovery of additional lease rentals and liquidated damages—Non-speaking judgment—Contract against public policy—Application for leave to defend the suit was dismissed by

Section 21 : Effect of mistakes as to law   2016  PLD  199   SUPREME-COURT PAKISTAN RAILWAYS through AGM(Trafic), Lahore VS FOUR BROTHERS INTERNATIONAL (PVT) LTD 2(e) & Chap. II [Ss.10 to 30-C]—Agreement, rescission of—Agreement between the parties had the status of a statute and unless it was shown that any term of the agreement was

Section 20 : Agreement void where both parties are under mistakes as to matter of fact    2022  PLD  73   SUPREME-COURT MUHAMMAD FAROOQ VS JAVED KHAN 20—Agreement void where both parties under a mistake as to matter of fact—Scope—Mistake of fact relating to the area of land being sold was recognised as essentially fundamental for

Section 19 : Voidability of agreements without free consent   2020  CLC  1691   HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR HALEEMA BIBI VS AZEEM S.5 & Sched.—Contract Act (IX of 1872), S.19—Marriage—consent of woman—Necessity—Scope—Guardian of woman—Responsibility—Scope—Voidability of agreement without free consent—Scope—Guardians are enjoined by Islam to get their daughters married after getting their consent—Consent of a woman is necessary; she cannot

Section 18 : Misrepresentation   2023  MLD  1911   LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE HASTAM ASHRAF MANN VS MUHAMMAD MOHSIN Ss. 17 & 18—Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 12(2)—Application under S. 12(2), C.P.C.—Fraud and misrepresentation, meanings of—Words “fraud”, “misrepresentation” and “want of jurisdiction” have not been defined in the Civil Procedure Code, 1908,—It is appropriate to borrow plain

Section 17 : “fraud” defined   2023  MLD  1911   LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE HASTAM ASHRAF MANN VS MUHAMMAD MOHSIN Ss. 17 & 18—Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 12(2)—Application under S. 12(2), C.P.C.—Fraud and misrepresentation, meanings of—Words “fraud”, “misrepresentation” and “want of jurisdiction” have not been defined in the Civil Procedure Code, 1908,—It is appropriate to borrow