Find a Lawyer

MST. AMTUL KARIM versus ROSHAN DIN

Sections 8, 42 and 54 of the West Pakistan Civil Rent Ordinance (VI of 1959), Section 15 (8) of the Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), and VIII, R3, declaration of title and occupancy recovery invalid Claimants claiming to be the owner of the suit property in order to have the final effect through the hiring controller claimed to have acquired the possession on the basis that the measles number mentioned in the sale deed was different in favor of the accused. Did not belong to this property. Defendants Defendants pleaded that the appellate court had already decided the question of ownership in the appeal against the order of eviction by the Rent Controller and that the decision by the appellate court was dismissed by the trial court. But the appellate court overturned these findings and dismissed the case in favor of the defendants. The defendants remained in their possession, the misinterpretation of the measles number could not be considered in any case nor the decisive factor. Appeal Court's finding in the appeal against the order of removal of the appellate court as legal Could. The High Court refused to confirm or approve the Appellate Court's position in accepting the appeal of the defendants' decision, and the order was upheld by the appellate court and the trial court was reinstated. Was. advocate for immigration from Quetta lawyer