Find a Lawyer

PEER BAKHSH versus NABI BAKHSH

Section 3, 6 and 14 of the Special Relief Act (of 1877), scope suit for granting non-agricultural status to the interchange of sections 42, sections 3, 6 and 14 of the Punjab Alliance of Land Act, 1900 The claim was determined that they were the seller of the suit land in advance of the defendants' interest as they were in disputed possession of the property as their owners, since the sale of the suit land in favor of the defendants was denied. And the trial court and the appellate court, respectively, issued the order. The defendants challenged the unanimous decisions and orders of the courts on the basis of the bars contained under Sections 3, 6 and 14 of the Punjab Alliance of Lands Act, 1900, claiming that the plaintiffs were non-agricultural. And in their written statements, the defendants did not raise any special status application. As the plaintiffs were non-agricultural, there was no material in the record which could suggest that the plaintiffs were non-agricultural. The defendants did not specifically request that the plaintiffs be non-agricultural and that they were not eligible on record. Such a charge has been proved by the content of the admissible material, so as to attract the bars contained in Sections 3, 6 and 14 of the Punjab Alliance of Lands Act, 1900. In the absence of any such evidence to prove that the plaintiffs were non-agricultural, in the absence of any such evidence, sections 3, 6 and 14 of the Punjab Separation of Land Law Act, 1900 could not be drawn, On the basis of which the facts of the two courts may be present, evidence could not be found on the record. When intervened by the High Court when the defendants law firms from Chowk Azam lawyer