Find a Lawyer

ASHFAQ AHMAD versus GHULAM HUSSAIN

Section 4, 15 and 21 of the Punjab Pre-Emission Act 1913, Land Reforms Regulation, 1972 (MLR 115), para 25 except the right to be exploited before the harassment, the plaintiff's claim asserted prematurely on the basis that The shopkeeper was a non-alien while he was the owner in the estate and the brother of the shopkeeper, in which case the plaintiff has the right to pre-arrest because he was an unlicensed tenant in the suit land at that time. The trial trial court ruled in this case, but the appellate court below rejected the trial court's decision and the ruling that because the plaintiff had previously asserted the right to be acquitted on account of being a non-occupying tenant, this case Automatically transferred to collector's court The civil court had no jurisdiction to deal with the matter. The plaintiff not only sued, but also claimed to be the owner, of the right conferred by paragraph 25 of MLR 115 above. During the trial, the defendant's brother never pressured the tenant's application in the estate and the trial court held that the plaintiff's favor was due to her being the owner and brother of the seller. Had not previously claimed the rights. It was held that the trial court dismissed his request for a tenancy dispute that the premature dismissal claim should be sent to the collector's court, where he should reject his tenancy application and then proceed to trial. Should return to civil court. De Novo, the first appellate court dismissed the verdict and the order was set aside and the trial court immigration advocates phone number from Cherat lawyer