PADAHABI versus LAL DIN
Under the evidence of the preceding authorization on the part of the Martial Law Regulation 1972 No 115 Paras 2 (13) and the 25 Punjab Pre-Emission Act (IX of 1991), Section 6 non-tenancy tenant, the evidence proved that the suit land. It was illegal to take possession of the tenancy Wendy failed to prove that the plaintiff suit was merely a lease of the land, based on its uncontested tenancy, it was appropriate to sue the plaintiffs on the basis of their prior rights.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
best law firm from Ghuzdar lawyer
