Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ISMAIL versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, DEPALPUR, DISTRICT OKARA

Section 5, Schedule and 13 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), After the execution of an order suit for the maintenance of Article 199 constitutional application suit, the plaintiffs filed the execution request, the court lender was pleased to collect the whole data. The High Court, in its judgment, said that if the debtor's money was deposited by the decision-maker, the sale of the property owned by the judgment in the auction in connection with the execution of the decree could be considered separately, the judge said. Non-declared deposit, but nonetheless, the submission court proceeded with execution while the court proceeded to sell. In order to sewn. The indebted country of the judgment did not give any schedule, even the sale price was not mentioned and there was no safe price shown for the execution of the judgment by the sale of the land of the judgment debtor There was no justification for approving the order and stopping the sale. The proceedings of Section 13 of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 were objectionable if the court asked for the collection of the data and if it refused to submit the illegal amount, it would be assessed as arrears of land revenue. And the proceedings of section 80 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act 1967 will apply if the imposing court did not understand it. An order was issued by the High Court in this case, after which any explanation can be applied by the imposing court, but once the court has given permission to the depositor to deposit the whole illegal amount. , Then the action Pakistan, top advocate family court from Kandiaro lawyer