Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD WARYAM versus SUPERINTENDING CANAL OFFICER (SCO),THAL CANAL CIRCLE, MIANWALI

Canal and Drainage Act 1873 Section 20 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), Section 115 Review Request Respondents' request to move their land from one store to another was dismissed by the Divisional Canal Officer but the Superintendent Canal Officer issued an order on appeal. Reverse ordered. Responding to the plaintiffs 'land in question where the applicants' claims for irrigating their land were excluded, as well as the applicant's notice of justification for their application under the Canal and Drainage Act. They were released and the two courts were heard. The question of fact was agreed upon and there was no room for reopening of the law revised scheme contained in the Canal and Sewerage Act, 1873, indicating that the order of the Divisional Canal Officer was only temporary. And only after it has been confirmed or modified will it be finalized. The decision of the Superintendent Canal Officer through the Superintendent Canal Officer, Te Hans, the final Superintendent Canal Officer, when using the power of the Divisional Canal Officer's order to edit or confirm, can be set aside and the controlling or superintendent of a competent party Can provide appropriate relief as the court has not pointed out the misinterpretation of the law in the court orders. The revision against the orders of the courts below was excluded without any merit. registration advocate from Sehwan lawyer