Find a Lawyer

PATHANA versus NOORA

West Pakistan Land Dispositions (Savings Investment) Ordinance 1959 Section 3 (1) Suit for occupying land included in the foreclosure foreclosure, which is part of the property without interest in the property, with the land sold during the stabilization proceedings. The suspects were allotted. The plaintiffs dismissed the lawsuit filed to occupy this part of the Schmalt Trial Court on the ground that the names of the foregoing in the interest of the plaintiffs were excluded from the Revenue Record, and no Shimlat land changed in favor of their successors. Was not done There is no share in the summons and its portion was separated from the defendants' rights. The lower appellate court dismissed the defendants' appeal. In the case of confession, summons may not be included under the provisions of section 3 (1) of the West Pakistan Land Disposition (Savings Ship) Ordinance. , 1959 Unless specifically referred to as the subject matter of disposi tion where the defendants' case was that the suit constitutes part of the plaintiff's suit, the lower appellate court erroneously found that The plaintiff's interest in the plaintiff's interest had no part in the trial court, as serious wrongdoing was committed in these words of concern about 5 3 (1) of the West Pakistan Land Disposition Ordinance, 1959. It was held that the finding of both the courts was reversed and that the sale of the judgment by the High Court verdicts and the orders of both should be without mutual rights. Was. The courts were laid down list of advocates from Kotli Loharan lawyer