Find a Lawyer

PERVAIZ versus AMIR AZIZ

Section 13 and 13 Landlords' Personal Needs Personal Property Changes in Property Property The relationship of the landlord and tenant to the tenants was that neither the property number was given in the eviction petition nor in the sale agreement (which The property was changed through), since such property was not identifiable. That the store limits given in the withdrawal request do not meet the limitations in the sales process. That the landlord and tenant had no relationship between the parties. That neither the shopkeepers nor the actual sales work was presented in evidence. That the evacuation order could not be ordered when the identity of the property was not clear, and that after the tenant's proof had expired, the landlord would have been allowed to produce documentary evidence, but the tenant would not have had a chance The record shows that the details of the property in the eviction request and the site plan attached to it have been proved by the description of the shop in the sale agreement. The shop is located in front of a specific shop and site. The plan confirmed the same sale deadline, which also revealed that there was a specific shop behind the dispute shop that was found to be correct in accordance with the site plan and that the boundaries given in the site plan and eviction application were also together. Are. A special shop was shown on one side of the shop and the main bazaar was also shown and there was a fourth lane. There was no contradiction in the description of the shop in the sale work and the request for a removal / site plan by which. High Court, Tenant Dispute divorce advocates from Village Sunder lawyer