Find a Lawyer

ZARSHAD versus SHAH GUL

Sections 39 and 44 of the Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), sections 58 and 60, found that in view of the revenue record, the appellants were the owners of the suit land, whose forefathers had mortgaged the suit, But they were not made fit on earth. Given that they had waived their right to a settlement, despite mortgaged successors, not having the notices appearing in the court to deal with the matter, it would be a strong speculation that it might have been obtained by the mortgage respondents in the Revenue Record. Entries were redeemed accordingly. Tenant non-filing bills and enclosures did not enter the login column respectively, as such, they were in the capacity of the tenants and in such capacity they could not claim ownership on the basis of negative occupancy because once the rent. Dadar was always there. The tenant and he could not request their right to evict the land because they were not mortgaged. ask a advocate free from Silanwala lawyer