Find a Lawyer

TALIB HUSSAIN versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB

Punjab Local Councils (Taxes on Transfer of Real Estate) Rules 1981 Rr 3 and 5 Civil Procedure Code (V8 1908), O XX, R 14 and Section 115 suits for collection of specific amount which the respondents have received in the district. Had felt as a council fee. In addition to the certified suit in favor of the decree for ownership by pre-emption, the appeal filed by the plaintiff was also dismissed by the courts below the litigation, before any subsequent sale, sale or exchange of any kind. Will not be declared prematurely. The Emperor (plaintiff) easily stepped into the seller's shoes on the basis of the right of substitution. There was no fresh transfer. The sale was dismissed on the ground that the plaintiff had a higher right. Such right was recognized by the court. The plaintiff was ordered to replace her. By OXX, R 14, the defendant Wendy the plaintiff upon payment of the required amount, CPC will automatically become the owner of the property without any interference with the sale agreement or the process of delivery, however, at the time of the original sale, the District Council The fee was charged, therefore, the respondents could not be allowed to double the transaction, therefore, on the basis of the decree on the basis of decree for premature expenses, there was no tax payable, there was a transfer. Element was not included and the amount cannot be recovered from the claimant, as it is a 5 5, Punjab Local Councils (tax on transfer of immovable property). S rules did not move means 1981, illegally charged amount was set and retrieve the plaintiff, the plaintiff claims that they violate the law by the courts, which will be entitled to return law firms from Garh More lawyer