Find a Lawyer

ABDUL KHALIQ versus ABDUL GHANI

Article 12 Civil Code of Conduct (v. 1908), O. VIII, R 4 and Section 115 amendment suit for declaration and permanent injunction that the plaintiff purchased the land through a sale agreement in which the plaintiff, who was his brother , Was shown a partner. Due to brotherly love, the owner of one / fourth of the property was paid for the property by the plaintiff but the possession of the land remained with the plaintiff to the extent that the rest of the land was in the possession of the claimant. The plaintiff stated that during 1978 the defendant recognized his right to the extent of his share in the said land and in return he got an auto-rickshaw which was his son's which the plaintiff eventually sold. The effect of praying for the declaration was that he was the owner of the suit land because the defendant sold, the defendant denied the allegations and the trial court dismissed the confession. n The appeal was that the plaintiff believed that the entire amount was paid to the defendant to consider the L / 4 shareholder land even though he did not spend anything on it and with the love and affection of the fraternity. The defendant's name was listed in the rights record. And he was the only anonymous owner of the property and his refusal was invalid under O VII1, R4, and the CPC should have made the decision on the basis of such disclosure denial, based on the valid evidence provided by the parties. There was widespread evaluation and debate. The two courts below the plaintiff failed to prove that it had delivered the defendant to the defendant in connection with the purchase of his share. The two petitions aggravated by the plaintiff conflicted with each other law websites from Mustang lawyer