Find a Lawyer

EJAZ AHMAD KHAN versus ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (REV.)/SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER (NOTIFIED OFFICER), LAHORE DIVISION, LAHORE

Sections 2 and 3 of the ICO Property and Homeless Laws (1975) Act 1975 (Pakistan), Article 199 Constitution Petition Notifying Officer on transfer of property transferred the entire property to the respondent while The CH form and the respondent's request for anonymity against the petitioner's predecessor was not found in the possession as per the report of the Deputy Tehsildar Tehsil of 16 in 1991. The applicants believed that such The report has little significance in the law; a report can be prepared in the absence of the party. The basis of the decision was that the survey list showed the two parties in possession of the houses, which was confirmed by the inspection of the first place as per the order of the Deputy Settlement Commissioner, according to which the respondent of 11 6 1960 appeared before the Deputy Settlement Commissioner. 27 2 1960 stated that a room was in his possession, thus, he could not claim all of it, nor was he entitled to insist on the same High Court as to the ad about entering the dispute. Had claimed the House preferentially, finding that both parties could be properly accommodated instead of leaving the other completely, so The right to move vertically in half every part, was considered fair and reasonable. The High Court was directed to appear before the notified officer having jurisdiction over the matter, who would limit and distribute the premises, keeping the convenience and ease of the parties and issue the documents for the relevant sections. Accordingly, the constitutional application was dismissed property advocates from Ukba lawyer