Find a Lawyer

ABDUL MALIK versus FIDA HUSSAIN

Article 2 (a), 6 and 13 Civil Code of Conduct (v. 1908), and VIII, R11 The right of first occupancy in connection with the real estate of a citizen for disturbance was a property of the real estate of the town by the plaintiff. Bought in 21 9 1993 and 3 11 1993 respectively. The plaintiff, who claimed to be a partner in the suit property, was the owner of the adjoining property and a shareholder of the facility, on February 20, 1994. And 3, 1994, respectively, against the plaintiffs' lawsuit claiming that the suit was a civilian, located within the urban area, that the lawsuit filed by the plaintiffs was not authorized by the plaintiff to dismiss the petition. , R 11, was filed under CPC which was accepted and the plaintiffs of the trial and appellate court both dismissed the cases concurrently that Section 2 of the Punjab Pre-emptive Act 1991 (A) has been declared inviolable by the integration of Islam; in relation to the suit land, the ham was authorized and his plaques could be rejected. The sale of the suit land in Leyte was made before the main date, ie 31st 1993, on which the delivery of Section 2 (a) of the Punjab Pre-Impression Act ended in 1991 when the Shariat Appeal of the Supreme Court ended. The Bench, in its judgment, as the plaintiff of PLD 1994 SC1, stated that in the dates when the sale of the suit land was sold, it was not taken away. Despite a pre-emption in relation to the suit land in the urban areas, the case could not be filed, the maps of the defendants were rejected by the courts simultaneously and said that the orders in the review by the High Court. property advocates from Ranipur lawyer