Find a Lawyer

NAWAB versus ALLAH DITTA

Failure to set the date for submitting purchase money in case of change in the case of AKX, R14 (1), Sections 145 and 144, the trial court in favor of pre-emptor in exercise of the jurisdiction of the appeal. What was In order to increase the purchase money, the order of the High Court was approved in the absence of the former emperors, but in the order passed by the High Court, no date was set for collecting the purchase money, before the High Court decision. , The order was executed. And the occupation was already handed over to the umpires Judge Sakat 144, requesting the restoration of possession under the CPC guaranteed that the former emperors had failed to collect a better purchase amount, the trial court / Executive Court Permits Appeal Filed By Decision Appeals filed and pre-empted by appellate court were dismissed by the appellate court; therefore, they did not know about the modification of the decree where the old kings The trial court, upset with the executive court, said it was ready to hand over the surplus money to the court This was in order to allow the collection of the former umpires. In the present case, the court failed to state the date of sale in the High Court, as per the provisions of OX, R14 (1), CPC, so the former umpires of the court case will not be punished or not. They can be fined The decisions passed by both the courts below were not sustainable and were set aside by the High Court. online advocate from Thari Mirwah lawyer