Find a Lawyer

ROSHAN ALI versus TALUKA COUNCIL KHAIRPUR NATHAN SHAH

Sections 39, 42 and 54 of the Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), section 115 suit for declaration, cancellation of sale and permanent injunction by the Ummah plaintiff claimed that he had purchased the plot in dispute over installments from the defendant. Was in possession of the plot. It was handed over in 1982. The second defendant objected to it, claiming that the plot in dispute was purchased by the plaintiff no.1 before the purchase of the plot mentioned by the plaintiff in 1980 and that he still paid installments till 1983. The plaintiff's trial court dismissed the claim for alleged purchase of the plot on the ground that the appellate court had allotted the plaintiff's number 2 before the purchase, remanding the trial court that the defendant wrote a written statement. Be forced to do And cancel the registered sale deed under unreasonable judgment and decree, and the valid evidence on record had proved that the plot in the dispute had bought T in defendant 2. He paid for the year 1983 till 1983, when there was no evidence to prove that the fake documents for payment of installments were fake and fake documents. Plaintiff No. 1 / seller again sold the same plot to the plaintiff in 1982 without cancellation. By this the second allotment / sale in favor of the plaintiff No.2 was not proper and legal without canceling the earlier sale document in favor of the plaintiff No.2 when the plot was allotted in the dispute / favor of the defendant. I was sold in the year 1980 2, which was not available for further sale / in the circumstances of the allotment appellate court in approving judicial judgment and decree. advocate for immigration from Lahore lawyer