Find a Lawyer

GHULAM MUHAMMAD versus EHSAN-UL-HAQ

Special Relief Act 1877 Section 42 and 54 West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), Section 42 Land Record Manual, Chapter 7, Para 4 suit declaration and gift for permanent injunction, the claim of the plaintiff was claimed Has made a claim about the property. The affirmation of the transfer of gifts in favor of the defendant in respect of the plaintiff's property was fraudulent. The plaintiff claimed that he did not give the gift of suit land in favor of the defendant, the possession of the suit land was not transferred to the plaintiff. And he did not appear before the competent authority and did not make any statement that he had given the controversial gift. None of the witnesses presented by the defendant had disposed of the facts of the gift other than the variable set up by the Patwari Circle that the question was unchangeable and was not confirmed in the Revenue State. ? The number of cows was not linked to the living, and none of the individuals were examined at the time of confirmation of the change. Union Council members were alive. Under question, in these circumstances the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967. Violations of the provisions in section 42 were clearly affirmed that, simply because the defendant's alleged gift-thumb impression appeared in favor of the defendant, the sheet was kept in place. It was not sufficient that this gift was given even otherwise in Chapter 4 of Chapter 7 of the Land Record Manual, under the circumstances While a change sheet was forbidden from taking a thumb impression on the courts, it was not meant to exclude the case from current decisions. And below are the two court rulings top advocate from Bagh lawyer