Find a Lawyer

GHULAM RASOOL versus GHULAM MUHAMMAD

Sections 42 and 54 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), Sections 11, 115 and O II, R2 Suit Declaration and Suit for Permanent Order Assistance Judiciary, in the first case, the plaintiffs' rule was that they were the owners of the suit land. He owned And that the defendants found in their name a change in the land of the suit approved by the plaintiff, and after the trial trial and the appellate court dismissed the first suit, the plaintiff filed another suit in the same suit. A second case was filed on the basis of modification. The mutation was approved earlier, under which the court dismissed the lawsuit filed by the plaintiffs when the below-mentioned plaintiffs claimed that they did not know about the changes made in the second case suit. Had not only been rejected by the two courts at the same time, but the review filed by the plaintiffs says that the simultaneous decision was also rejected by the High Court and the defendants did not give further verdict. Before the plaintiff's final claim was made in the Supreme Court judgment in the cases and then the suit was settled in relation to the land. I was not aware of the change which caused him to file a second case which he had no credibility to consider because the defendant had already filed a case. For 9 years in which the entire record of revenue was produced, however, the Titan claimed that he was unaware of the existence of a premature origin, rather than the originator, on the basis of which he dismissed his previous case. had gone. In the absence of any misreading or reading of evidence on the record, the investigating evidence presented on the record will be judged below. Pakistan, top advocate family court from Dudial lawyer