Find a Lawyer

MST. SATTO ALIAS SATTAN versus GAMAN

The Special Relief Act, 1877, Section 8 and 42 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), the controversial finding of the possession of immovable property without declaration of section 42, the instability on the claim of the plaintiff was that it was a joint venture on the suit. Was in possession The change in the sale of the suit land by the tenants and certified in the year 1967 was based on fraud The Claimant claimed that the Plaintiff had sold the land in his favor and subsequently acquired the land. I participated in the Family Distribution proceeding Plaintiff failed to prove her request. Disclosing the evidence available on record by presenting evidence of a reliable standard, he claims that the plaintiff did not present a tenant at the trial and thus failed to prove that he remained in his possession. And pays the share of production through the tenants. The seizure was filed without accelerating the change and no action was taken by the plaintiff at any stage. The case was unfamiliar, and the lawsuit was filed in 1988, with no trial owner agreeing to be the owner. The case was dismissed by the evidence presented by the plaintiff. Revenue authorities had some irregularities identified in the approval of the authority, especially in the case of the suspension of this case, the plaintiff's lengthy demeanor and appropriate silence was especially rejected. Suit online advocate from Dunyapur lawyer