Find a Lawyer

MST. AKBAR JAN versus MUHAMMAD ZAHOOR KAUSAR

Considering the sale of the suit for the pre-occupation of section & 42 of the Azad 14 Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (44), the plaintiff's determination to settle the matter claimed that the suit land. The amount was separated by Rs. The source returned the claimant's claim that the transaction between the seller and the seller was specifically alleged by him, but the trial court failed to resolve the dispute and that the matter was presented in this regard. Without doing so, conflict The trial court had settled a comprehensive case on whether the sale of Rs 9,45,000 was resolved in good faith which the seller never objected to. At that time, when any other case was tried by the court in the presence of the plaintiff, the case was brought before the appellate court which could not be allowed. The evidence to be taken may be denied by the plaintiff / transfer on the record. The court held that there was no need to compile another matter which was a useless issue; the ability to apply for immunity, despite the low merit, was rejected by the Supreme Court on the ground that the plaintiff's case. Is to pay the amount of the hearing as set out by the trial court: a specific date to avoid the dismissal of your case. immigration advocates email from Eminabad lawyer