Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD HAYAT KHAN versus RANA SAFDAR ALI

The suit for the declaration of passing of the Special Relief Act (of 1877), section 42 suit property, the owner of the suit property on the target date (ie 1 1961), which was considered by Settlement Scheme No. VII, Both courts relied on jamabandi entries and looked at the composition. According to their documentary evidence which supported the case of the plaintiff as he was in possession of the property in the relevant time, ie, 1961 and proceeding under the law under Settlement Scheme No VII. Had become the owner. The lack of jurisdiction of the civil court and the restoration of the case was properly attended to, and the courts responded by the defendants not to consider the evidence presented by them as presented in the fact. The sight had no meaning. On the material date the plaintiff was found in possession of the suit property thereafter there was no benefit of possession of the property and the inspection report of the place was reported missing. In the context of a real conflict, the importance is to capture the history of the goals. The courts did not commit any illegal move in reaching their consensus view in this matter; the High Court refused to intervene in the situation. best law firm from Naudero lawyer