Find a Lawyer

SAJJAD HUSSAIN versus IBRAHIM

Section 8 Homelessness (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958), Section 10 and Scheduled Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), Section 115 High Court's theoretical jurisdiction overturned the recovery of the facts by the following courts. Transfer Double Allotment Identification and Limitation Both parties have claimed ownership of the suit property purchased by them at different auctions under settlement law set on different dates. In addition to the limitations stated by both parties, the property and the title of the owner were not entitled. The two parties did not challenge the auction made in favor of each other; at the time of the revocation of the withdrawal rules, there was nothing pending about the rights arising from the parties, filed by the plaintiff. Upon request, the Settlement Officers proceeded with the demarcation and found that the suit property had already been auctioned in favor of the defendants and Sao I was in possession of. The settlement authorities concluded that the two properties Were disposed of separately and had no relation or relationship with each other. S had this limitation that the plaintiff plaintiff rejected both the trial and appeal courts respectively in the suit, which was claimed to be a property of the defendant. Since there was nothing pending regarding the rights arising from the parties, in the present court, the civil courts had no jurisdiction to entertain the plaintiff. , Failed to prove that he was the owner of the property owned by the defendant best advocate from Tarnol lawyer