Some essential aspects of a hire purchase agreement are highlighted in this article. The law provides that if property has been leased under a hire-purchase agreement and “the relevant portion of the hire-purchase price” has been paid, the owner cannot assert the right to repossess the property from the tenant, except through legal action to recover the property. The Hire-Purchase Act defines what “relevant part of the hire-purchase price” means: The meaning of hire-purchase is defined in the Hire-Purchase Act. According to the provision of S. It should be noted that a reference to section 19 of section 1 of the Hire-Purchase Act confirms the fact that, in addition to the fact that the Hire-Purchase Act regulates both the hire-purchase transaction and its agreement on enforcement by the parties, the Hire-Purchase Act gives the Minister the power to make regulations with his agreement for the subsequent regulation of the hire-purchase transaction. The provision of section 19 entitled “POWER OF THE MINISTER TO EXCLUDE GOODS, ETC. OF THE APPLICATION OF THE LAW” and the provision of Article 19 of the Law are as follows: in addition to the definition of hire-purchase, it should be said that an additional reference to the provision of Article 1 of the Hire-Purchase Act shows that, unlike other contracts, when the parties are free to reduce their general conditions in writing, the hire-purchase transaction and the agreement of the parties are therefore governed by the Hire-Purchase Act. Thus, the sui generis hire-purchase operation is a private contract as for other contracts. The provision of § 1 entitled (TRANSACTIONS GOVERNED BY THE HIRE-PURCHASE ACT) provides as follows: Please, is it constitutionally permissible to enter into two (2) agreements that specify different amounts for a single property? Example, lease-purchase of a motorcycle with the indication # 30,000 per month for 7 months, this agreement consists of a company stationery including the registration number of the company. While another agreement stipulates #50,000 for the same 7 months on the same bike. From the foregoing, it is indisputable and deductible that the hire-purchase transaction is a special transaction, the agreement of which on the conditions, including the guarantees, is governed by the law of parliament and that, therefore, the parties are not free to do what they want, nor to conclude themselves a concluded agreement that violates any provision of the Hire Purchase Act.
How, then, can the rental object be claimed from the landlord and not reimburse the full amount of money paid by the tenant in the form of payments to the landlord because the tenant failed or refused or neglected or failed to pay one or two instalments without resorting to the provision of the Hire Purchase Act on the necessary step of the landlord to repossess the Hire Purchase Act? Merchandise? In Halsbury`s Laws of England Vol. 1st edition, a hire-purchase agreement was defined as follows: The deposit of goods in accordance with an agreement under which the bailee may purchase the goods or under which ownership of the goods will be or may pass to the surety. (5) As a general rule, the hire-purchase agreement is required to indicate the circumstances in which the owner may terminate the contract. . . .