Find a Lawyer

GHULAM MUHAMMAD versus TOWN COMMITTEE PIPLAN THROUGH ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER/ADMINISTRATOR, DISTRICT MIANWALI

Section 42 of the Punjab Local Government Ordinance (VI of 1979), Section 121 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), O VII, R 11 suit sought the declaration of the plaintiff's declaration rejecting that their shops / properties were to be demolished. A notice was sought in connection with. Be declared illegal by the defendant authority and on the solemnity of the authority which had no jurisdiction or authority to demolish the said shops / Khokha plaintiff acknowledges that the property on which the shops were said / The plaintiffs have built they have authority. That the plaintiff was neither a tenant under the authority nor had he applied for restitution to the provincial government and that the plaintiff was paying `tawan for the plaintiff's property encroachment and in his suit his Submitted no documents in support of the proceedings made by the court and challenging their notices had no significance in the eyes of the law nor was they accused of taking any action to the suit court. I could have filed that before this case is pending if it did not disclose the matter or thereby ban it. Was done No law or proper form was made, and if the court was fully convinced that it would be a futile exercise to hold the plaintiffs in unauthorized possession of the property in a future dispute. The plaintiff had shown that there was no cause for action to file the plaintiffs, in which case, Plaintiff correctly denied. immigration advocates contact from Kohistan lawyer