Find a Lawyer

LAHORE CANTT. C.H.S LTD versus BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS (PVT) LTD

Section 2 (xxxvii) and 108 (g) of the Cantonment Act 1924, the property of the plaintiff / appellant of the cantonment board was denied to the plaintiff / defendant the right to use the road from the pretext that the plaintiff / appellant's property road in dispute. Is privately owned by Cantonment Board Land, a metal road that could be owned by the plaintiff / appellant down the road, but once this road was built and was generally in public use, Under and under it the possession was owned by the Cantonment Board. Under the provisions of Sections 2 (xxxvii) and 108 (g) of the Cantonment Act, 1924, it cannot be said that the road in question is privately owned by the pending plaintiff / Appellant Road, therefore, belongs to the Cantonment Board and not The defendant / appellant, under any arrangement, cannot claim to be the owner of a public road, the right of way to a road owner is recognized in law and such right cannot be taken away. anyone us immigration advocates from Lalshanra lawyer