Find a Lawyer

ATTAULLAH versus ZARDAD KHAN

Section 42 suit for the plaintiff claimed that he was the owner of the suit and was in permanent possession as the landlord, but the defendants received a certified certificate of sale of the suit land in their favor. However, the plaintiff never sold the land. This has never been confirmed by the defendants and the variable in this regard. The trial court and the appellate court both dismissed the case in which the Waltetti plaintiff denied any sale or any altered certified suspect that there was a deferred sale and one of the defendants granted a valid change in his favor. Alihan had to prove a legitimate sale transaction in his favor. The defendants did not present proof of the original mutation, and the Revenue Officer confirming the change in their favor was not presented by them even until the lambard who allegedly identified the plaintiff. Was done and there was no evidence of it. There was no evidence in the case of the accused. There was no evidence as to the case of the accused. The present decisions and orders of the courts were set aside. The case filed by the plaintiff will be considered pending before the trial court. The trial will provide an opportunity for the court to prove the evidence allegedly sold in their favor. It will decide whether the plaintiff has legally sold the suit to the defendants best advocate from Manoabad lawyer