Find a Lawyer

YASEEN versus KALU ALIAS HASHIM ALI

Review of the decree suit for declarations of sections XXVII, R1 and section 9 of the Special Relief Act (I of 1877), section 42 of the Displaced Persons (Land Settlement) Act (XLVII of 1958), sections 10 and 25, wherein the legal heirs of the victims Is entitled to inherit as a trial court, dismissing him on the ground that the allotted property in 30 197 1972 was invalid and jurisdictional evidence, but the successor judge approved the request for review by the defendant. The appeal was dismissed; the appellate court has already determined the restoration of the deceased's legacy. As it is capable of determining, as provided under section 10 of the Landless Settlements Act, 1958, the trial court of 30 197 1972 correctly observed in its judgment that the petitioner sought The Declaration, if given, will present such a decision by the rehabilitation authorities. Inheritance ineffective; Plaintiffs did not allege that the rehabilitation authorities had taken legal action or were in breach of the legal provisions. And the jurisdiction of the civil court was restrained by the reviewing judge not re-hearing the case beyond the scope of the review, the reviewing judge took an unlawful action to observe that there would be a mistake of law. Not giving jurisdiction to review a judge by his predecessor only to appreciate the evidence that had passed the judgment on qualifications and revised the case and evidence on record in the review process Was an illegal re-definition of the proceedings, the appellate court recognized the findings filed through repeated review. online advocate from Dunyapur lawyer