Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD YAQOOB versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB

Section 42 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), under section 573 civil courts, had jurisdiction to seek fact-finding through the courts below disputes related to the allotment of Ahata in favor of the defendants. The court decided the case in favor of the defendants. And the appellate court upheld the judgment and order passed by the trial court-plea taken by the plaintiff that the civil court did not have jurisdiction to decide the case that the Waldetti plaintiff himself contradicted the orders of the Revenue Enforcement. Petitioned with a civil court jurisdiction request. After setting aside the orders, following the unjustified decision, the plaintiff could not say that the civil court had no jurisdiction to decide the case, both of the above courts had jurisdiction to decide on the civil suit and Then decide the appeals that arise that inquire about the fact or law presented by the courts. The authorized jurisdiction, though invalid, cannot be interfered with in the exercise of the amendment. Conduct Unless such conclusions are based on any evidence, the finding of arbitrary or impartial harmony on both fact and law recorded by the following courts was based on the evidence supported by the correct and plausible reasoning and not any The circumstances were not excluded from the scope of the review. advocate from Sargodha lawyer