Section 13 and 22 of the Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), section 52 Tolbs, a former Impression suit filed by the plaintiff after the plaintiff's decision on the sale of property by Wendy, was dismissed by the appellant. The court validity suit was filed against the 3d 2001 certified cell deed in 19 6 2001, however, the suit was transferred back to the seller by registered date on 1 5 2001, the plaintiff alleged. That the sale was knowledgeable on 11 6 2001 and the notice was issued on 13 October 2001, before the student was executed after the alleged duplication and after sending notice of the student, the accused plaintiff. Had to file a case against the latest transaction and there was no previous case. After that time no pre-sale litigation was filed against the sale and it remained unaddressed. The FF did not speak out against any subsequent transactions as no lawsuit was filed against the same claimant / vendors in advance and the names of any vendors or anyone else before the plaintiff's institution Was not prevented from transferring property on. If Wendy's suit was entered into a fresh transaction / sale during the pendency, it would not have been effected, but if this had not been the case before the company suit, neither Section 22 of the KP Pre-Emission Act of 1987 nor the Transfer of Property Act, Section 52 of 1882 shall be. Applicable modifications were rejected in the circumstances
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2015
