Sections 2 (2) and 4 of the Special Relief Act (of 1877), Articles 42 and 54 of the suit and declaration of injunction, on the basis of the previous and closed transaction Civil Court, in the jurisdiction of the plaintiffs, to verify the sale conversion suit. Were owners. 26 6 1975 The plaintiffs' complaint was that in 1995, the authorities rejected the original allotment of suit land filed by the plaintiffs by the trial court while the appeal filed by the plaintiffs was dismissed by the lower appellate court. And the powers conferred on the notification officer were limited to completing the residual work in terms of sections 2 (2) and 4 of the Evacuation Property and Homelessness Act (1975) Act 1975. The notification officer did not have the authority to extend his jurisdiction to enter a question legally. Or otherwise in any allotment made before the EQE Property and Homelessness Act (repealed) Act, 1975, wherein the cases of pending adjournment were obtained under the terms of section 2 (2). ) The Evacuee Property and Homelessness Act (repealed) Act 1975 did not mean closing and reopening of past transactions, until the remand of cases by the High Court did not give notification officers the power to close the closed cases. Reopen, which has reached the maximum required under the law. The civil court had jurisdiction to amend the wires of the Equity Property and Displacement Laws (1975) Act, 1975, where the Tribunal / Notified Officer travels beyond the jurisdiction in the case where an action is taken before him. Not pending or remand received by the High Court Notification Officer and dealing with the past
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2015
