Find a Lawyer

JAWAD LIAQAT versus MUHAMMAD LAL

Section 14 (2) (vi) of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Rental Act 1986, VIII of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Signature Act (VIII of 1974), both of which apply for removal of the effect filed by the landlord. The controller accepted. And below, the appellate court did not raise any objection to the tenant's controller on the issue of recovery of the case without presenting a case in respect of the eviction request. It is requested that the landlord, in the writ petition filed before the High Court, had also been discriminated against for not defrauding the case in connection with the dishonor of the petition. The tenant, despite living on the important matter, Had previously failed to raise a petition in this case. The Rent Control and Appellate Court, arguing the case to the tenants before the High Court, was too late to raise such a plea that the NTS seriously prejudiced the issue on a 6-year non-petition. That is, the High Court did not exercise its writ jurisdiction to sit as an appeal court against the decisions of the special jurisdiction tribunals, except when the provisions of the CPC had no authority. Applicants' dispute for settlement of such matters was resolved in due course top advocates from Thana Bula Khan lawyer