Find a Lawyer

MISKEEN SHAH versus CUSTODIAN, EVACUEE PROPERTY, AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARABAD

Articles 6A and 11 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Rehabilitation Act 1974 (XII of the Administrative Property) Act (XII of 1957) (as in Azad Jammu and Kashmir Sections 18A, 18B and 43 Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII). 1974), Appeals for Land Allotment in Sections 42 and 44, which the Appellant alleges that the land allotment in the dispute in favor of the Defendant was false and forfeited, affirming that in favor of the Defendant. The allotment was premature when the appellant once conceded that the allotment of land in the dispute in favor of the defendant was premature, in order to prove the fraud. The heavy burden was placed on him and the fact that the allotment was a fake, the appellant refused the charge as he could not produce any passionate material in this case. The respondent's allotment was fake, by the appellant. It was also not precluded in clear terms whether the allotment in favor of the defendant was a fake or fraudulent appellant ??? at any stage before the restoration was authorized or before the Custodian or the High Court claimed that the respondent's allotment. Was fake or fraudulent and this was the first time it was said that a petition was raised in the Supreme Court which was requested Was not raised before the Lower Tribunals or in the High Court. , Cannot be allowed to rise for the first time in a writ petition filed without leading parties required, it was rightly dismissed by the High Court and the dismissal order passed by the High Court in the appeal cannot be interrupted. top advocate from Kohistan lawyer