Find a Lawyer

ATTA MUHAMMAD versus MEMBER (CONSOLIDATION), BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB, LAHORE

The Consolidation Scheme, validated by Articles 10, 11 and 13 of the West Pakistan Stability Holding Ordinance 1960, was challenged in the appeal and the appeal was dismissed; after the appeals were rejected, they remained silent for almost three years. The stability of the application was moved to. Instead of challenging the appellant, the dismissal order, enjoined on the original order to dismiss the appeal through another appeal, against the order passed in the first appeal by the second appellant in the absence of a plausible explanation. I was not authorized. The matter was no longer challenged when their first appeal was dismissed even if the original order was invalid, the appeal was later banned on time and the appellant failed to convince the court that the second The appeal was worth it because the earlier appeal was dismissed, the appellant did not opt. To challenge this order cannot be aggravated by the matter, the past and the closed transaction rule may have a new appeal otherwise the sustainability authorities had become an afterview of the finalization of the stabilization scheme and through a miscellaneous application or fresh appeal. Cannot be exacerbated by the matter through top advocates from Kamokey lawyer