Find a Lawyer

CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR AUQAF, PUNJAB versus SYED GHULAM MOHY-UD-DIN

Punjab Waqf Properties Ordinance 1979 Sections 2 (e), 7, 11 and 12 as the property of Waqf Property Chief Administrator Waqf Tee, N, Punjab took over a notification and administered, control of the monastery Hazrat Shah Sidman of , Manage and manage. And the adjoining properties were challenged by the Scheduled Respondents / Claimants under Section 11, Punjab Waqf Property Ordinance, 1979 the The land mentioned in this notification was owned and owned by them because it was given by the Hindu owner. Was. The interests of the respondents / claimants, as a result of the advance interest gift memorandum and that they were owned by the successor, were the result of property not being disputed in the dispute and it was devoted to the notification issued by the authority. There is a case for legalization. Based on the memorandum of gift by non-Muslim in favor of the predecessor in the interest of the defendant and the evidence produced by the court, the difficulties posed by the respondents / claimants have shown that the claimant's grandfather was on the non-Muslim side. Cannot capture property from The effect of the deployment of dedicated property witnesses is that the property in dispute is owned by the claimants where there is no trace. Neither was any offer made by anyone nor was any notice available on advance notice. In the circumstances, it has not been proved that the property in dispute is a dedicated property under which the Punjab dedicated property ordinance for control. Notification may be made under Section 7 of 1979. Court concludes that property in dispute is not dedicated property, not illegal Pakistan, top advocate family court from Burewala lawyer