Find a Lawyer

SARDAR versus MST. RUQAYYA BEGUM

Sections 8 and 9 of the Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Article 120 The plaintiff accused of fraudulent possession of property, an illiterate and vulnerable woman, who alleged that she had acquired her property in connection with the plaintiff's woman 30. / Was living 40 miles. Off the ground in question, it was claimed that he owned agricultural land under the occupation of the forefathers in the interest of the defendants, who in 1962 took possession of the said land under a 10-year lease and gave him some money in advance. As given Since she was an uneducated and simple woman, he had signed a contract to sell her 7 11 1962 as a bandit, and with this, her thumbs were found fraudulently and later, on the same 28 28 1963. They sold it to. Execution; although it was not yet allotted the land, the property was transferred to the predecessor in the interest of the defendant by the said sale process and since it was 35/40 miles away from the relevant point. Was living on The property was located and in the interest of the defendants the predecessor was paying her dues, therefore, she could not detect fraudulent and fraudulent transfer in their names. In 1979, when the defendants stopped paying the lease, he became aware of a fraudulent transaction. And this agreement was in the history of 7 11 1962, Anonymous No 289 1963, and the related changes were invalid and ineffective against its rights and interests because it was the product of a collective, fraudulent and fraudulent transaction. , Which occurred under the units of the earth. , Was also recently certified and sold in connection with the property that is now best advocate from Mustang lawyer