Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD HAYAT versus GHULAM HUSSAIN

Section 4 (3) and (4) of the Homeless Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act 1958 are considered under consideration and the vacancy of such property and non-eviction of the property is considered on the ground that the original appellant. Upon receipt of the vacancy, the knowledge of the auction first requested its transfer in his name. The property status issue was crushed on threadbare and the Commissioner of Settlement concluded that the property owned by the trust property was not vacant but empty property. In the preliminary litigation regarding two other plots, the position on which the property in question was exactly the same was found to be vacant property. There was no indication that the property in question was of a temple, but was described as a vegetable market by the original leasehold person. And the orders of the Settlement Commissioner under which such property was deemed to have been vacated had finalized the property; thus, the property was to be vacated, not the vacant property. famous supreme court advocate from Rajana lawyer