Sections 30 and 16 of the Specific Relief Act (of 1877), Section 42 Allotment Scope jurisdiction of the Board of Revenue Scope of Plaintiffs claiming that the suit land was allotted to them by the defendants. It was that Ultimate was not entitled to ownership rights. In addition, the litigation was decided before the government resumed leasing on leaseholders and they were allotted to the plaintiffs of the particular land - a request that the lease be granted - to the former tenant. Cultivation was less than 50% was not endorsed by his own testimony No material on record had any adverse effect of record inadequacy on the Allies to prove their fraud or misrepresentation or ineligibility request. Did not have the rights to cancel the allotment to the Member Board of Revenue or to cancel any messaging made by the member board. No jurisdiction. Under section 30 (2) of the Government Land Colonization (Punjab) Act, 19, the clearances of taxes were without the 12 legitimate powers and had no legal effect, which was implemented in favor of the Convention Debt Allotment. Ownership rights were acquired after the payment of a significant amount of money, there is no reasonable scope for the parties to take possession of the completion of the Convention Deed under any conditions. Or the Member Board of Revenue has jurisdiction to reject the jurisdiction of the court itself, not to read any misunderstandings or evidence in the concurrent inquiry of the courts below, by judicial error, facts or legal instability. Of the accused found in related decisions and orders
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
