Find a Lawyer

SAFDAR ALI versus MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE, CHARSADDA

Specific Relief Act 1877 Section 42 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), OI, R 8 suit, for plaintiff's declaration of litigation, the plaintiff alleges that the authorities converted their property into a public park revenue record. And the witness testified that the plaintiff remained in cultivating the suit land, that the suit land was not acquired by the authorities in accordance with the law, nor that the authorities paid any compensation to the plaintiffs but the trial court appealed. On this basis, it is appealed that the suit should have been filed in the capacity of the representative, the legitimate registration of the suit land authority to others. This was the equivalent of an invasion of property. Authorities do not have the right to enter any land in the legitimate possession of a citizen. The OI, R 8, CPC was only competent and authoritative and in nature did not require that the suit be assigned to Representative C. Non-compliance in the case in which many persons are interested in the suit or proceedings and any person who has the right to freely defend his right to the Court of Appeal, shall be liable for non-compliance with this case. The dismissal cannot be justified. 1, the R8 CPC decision and the order passed by the appellate court were set aside and the plaintiff's case was ordered to be reviewed accordingly. immigration advocate from Kashmore lawyer