Find a Lawyer

DURI (MST.) versus SAID AKBAR

A mortgaged underground by the respondents of the Property Act 1882 Section 60 Registration Act (XVI of 1908), Sections 17 and 49 of the Constitution (Article 10 of 1984), Article 79 Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Section 35 Was. His interests were in the forefront and he subsequently left the country, taking advantage of the defendant's absence from the country, to seize his property through similar designs, fake and fabricated documents. Which did not meet the legal requirements, thus could not give it any honor. The title of the unregistered dubious document, which was denied by the respondent for execution, was proved in terms of Article 79, Law in the testimony, 1984 1984 1984, even if he was 30 years genuine. Whatever was available for documentation was rejected. Under Sections 17 and 49, the Registration Act, 1908, could not produce any title in favor of the applicants as there was no registration. After the institution suits / requests for land settlement by the respondents as counter-claimants, the nurse or their predecessor claims that the respondents had no property in the property owned by them for 60 years. In the last 60 years, there was no basis for any case. At the time of redemption when the suit for specific performance filed by the petitioners was demanded and the score was entitled to restriction only, the conclusions reached by the two courts on the basis of good results. And were well argued that did not suffer from reading false news or reading evidence. Record, this criminal advocate from Chilas lawyer