Find a Lawyer

SH. ATTA MUHAMMAD versus ZAHID UMAR HAYAT

Sections 13 and 22 allowed the removal of a housing resource for reconstruction by the courts below the facts set out for the reconstruction of the property allowing the rent controller to rent the house for reconstruction. The withdrawal order approved by the Rent Controller was maintained as needed. The ploy taken by the tenant through the appellate court was that the landlord did not have the resources to renovate, so the need for this purpose was not clear. The landlord successfully stepped in to rebuild it, as he worked hard and waited for a long-term construction project to be approved by a civil court order on behalf of the landlord. The efforts made by him for this purpose were indicative of his good faith and good faith and any doubts or concerns should be dispelled over the same result. The main issue was cohesive and there was no justification for properly and properly examining such evidence. No misrepresentation and misreading of any evidence was found, which revealed the harmony of the courts below that the Western No intervention was sought by the High Court in the appeal under Section 22 of the Pakistan Civil Rental. Ordinance of Prohibition, 1959 Second appeal dismissed list of supreme court advocates from Muzaffargarh lawyer