MUSSA versus ALI
Gilgit-Baltistan Right of Prevention Regulation 1938 Regulation 1 Suit for pre-emption Claimant claimed that defendant (vendor) had sold the property in question to the second defendant (s), but to avoid a pre-arrest case, The defendant (s) were collectively and fraudulently executed. In the evidence, the plaintiff (lawyer) has a registered gift in favor of the plaintiff in relation to the property, in which the plaintiff's lawyer admitted during the argument that there was no direct evidence of the sale transaction. ? ) However, the Gift Deed registered through credible evidence has succeeded in proving that the courts below have unanimously found that the plaintiff had failed to prove the alleged sale of the gift.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
tax advocates from Kamalia Musa lawyer
