Find a Lawyer

MUZAFFAR versus CHANANI JAN

The Special Relief Act 1877 Section 42 suite for the declaration and injunction relating to the land in question was rejected by the courts below the valid entries in the Revenue Record that it is clear that the claimants were the tenants of the land, according to their claim. Has not been done, could the landlords of such land have been able to cite any document which shows that they are underground? , The oral evidence brought on record in its own right did not support the defendants' argument that they really owned such a country. The defendants contend that they had purchased the land in question from the defendants and that no evidence could be exploited when the mutation in connection with the alleged transaction was later canceled when it was objected to by the opposing parties. So, this did not indicate that there was a fair transaction. Allegations such as sale and sale between the parties were claimed, therefore, there was no interference with the decisions and orders of the courts under which the plaintiff was excluded for lack of evidence. list of supreme court advocates from Pishin lawyer