Find a Lawyer

SULEMAN versus ZEENAT JAN

Specific Relief Act 1877 Section 42 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) of the plaintiff's declaration and suit for his decree that he was the owner of the land he owned and his transaction in connection with his sale. Of The defendants did not accept eligibility for unpaid payment, were dismissed by the High Court, the trial court partially dismissed the appeal and the High Court completely dismissed the affirmative jurisdiction, the plaintiffs taking the stand. It was supposed that his trial was dropped on July 6. The burden of proof in regard to payment of the sale by the High Court as a whole was on the defendants who positively claimed that they had made the payment in question after the refusal by the plaintiff of such payment and in this regard The evidence presented by the parties was not proper. The First Appellate Court and the High Court examined the Plaintiff further arguing that the mutation was not approved and the occupation was sustained by the Plaintiff's leave to appeal to the Supreme Court for not considering the sale. A brief evidence was approved in the light of the disputes raised family advocate from Topi lawyer