Find a Lawyer

SHER versus DOST MUHAMMAD

Specific Relief Act 1877 Section 42 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) The suit for the claimants claimed that the land was purchased by them in a contract thirty years ago after paying the sale price. That should be the case, to the owners of the land, the trial court ruled that the defendants had not paid the land in dispute for a long time to the plaintiffs; it was a matter in favor of the plaintiffs that they were going to the lower appellate court. Has been permanently occupying the land as the owner of the land, and the High Court granted the trial by the defendants thirty years after the sale price. The judgment and decree passed by the writ were set aside, but they did not offer any receipt for the alleged payment of the sale price, nor was there evidence of the execution and registration of any document. About 20 years before the sale agreement was filed by the plaintiffs, a defendant transferred the land in dispute with Tamil to one of his sons, but on such an exchange by the defendants, the appellate court and the High Court Upon the proper evaluation of the evidence presented by the parties on record, no objection was made to the dismissal, along with the appellate court and the High Court's findings. The court cannot be affected by any illegal interference or misreading of the material or reading of any material evidence in the review; the Supreme Court cannot interfere with the matter without dismissing the appeal without merit. Was done advocate for immigration from Qalandarabad lawyer