Find a Lawyer

MST. AMATUL BEGUM- versus MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM SHAIKH

Sections 2 (a) (e) (h) and 15 evacuation requests were leased to the justice administration's jurisdictional dispute-covered tenant to remove the flour mill and the appeal was respectively rented. The Controller and the High Court had dismissed. On the basis that the cover is of a commercial nature and the purpose of the flour mill is not permitted to go out of the installation, it will not fall under the definition of Prem Building \ or `premises of, such as Section 2 of the Indus Tenant Areas. (A) and (E) are described. Accordance to Ordinance, 1979 The technically hired and the High Court may be correct that the house was left out for the establishment of a flour mill before trial, was not eligible for trial. ? famous supreme court advocate from Kot Bunglow lawyer