Find a Lawyer

HAKEEM SHAH versus SAWAB KHAN

Article 144 West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), Section 39 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) Respondents of illicit occupation complained of the respondents - it was claimed that they became owners of the iReal Source. Have been The trial court dismissed the appeal and the review case filed by the appellants, respectively, the appellate court and the high court had not brought anything with validity to prove that the land once disposed of in the nature of granted serie the can go. On the basis that this is a grant and not a rental. In the village Bishnkot no special or common practice was proved that the \ Seri khorus cultivation is listed as the tenant in the rent column in the cultivation column as (Bala Lagan Bawaja Suri) can claim the title. The land was especially contrary to the Punjab Settlement Manwa, according to the column rent column entries with the proprietary column or proprietary column owners E-Kabaza. I was the landowner who bought it in the village without a share in the village and was listed in the cultivation column (Malikan e Qaba), and did not target the appellant as a tenant. Because they were standing as listed in the rent column (Bala Lagwana Suri) The High Court rightly stated that the appellants could not be treated as (Siri Khoursas) (Owners e Occupation) column of dedication. Entry and cultivation of the cultivation column being intercorrelated, the appellants could not rule out the title of the proprietor in the rights record. Such non-negotiable entries meant that the cultivator of the cultivation of cirri-source cultivation as a tenant in the column ask a advocate free from Jamshoro lawyer