Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ASLAM versus MUHAMMAD HAYAT

Articles 2 (d), 6 and 13 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 (1973), Article 185 (3) of the pre-discrimination suit question whether the transaction was a sale or a transfer determination petitioners, transferred their residential plot and What exactly did it get in return? Responding to the transfer of agricultural land, respondents said that the transaction as a sale, premature independent transaction claiming pre-emptive autonomy, the trial court is unreasonable defendant / pre-emptor's position that the umpire Had failed to prove that the exchange was a fact. The appellate court declared the transaction as one of sale and the appellate court's decision was upheld by the High Court. The petitioners had requested that against the sections 4 and 15 of the Punjab Pre-emptive Act, the Punjab Preamble Act 1991 Even in the presence of a clause, to make a 1913 transaction; which was, in fact, an exchange of sale, the Civil Court was not given any power to sell the relief transaction as a sale. Can declare Such a claim was neither filed by the applicants in their written statement or before the Court of Appeal or under the memorandum. The High Court was merely revised because there was no provision in Punjab, the Pre-emption Act, 1991 provided the civil court with the option of declaring the transaction as a sale, which appears to be one of the exchanges. Was not banned to determine the true nature of the case, cannot be allowed in the Civil Court, the Appellate Court and the High Court below; top civil advocates from Shahpur Chakar lawyer