Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AZAD versus MUSHTAQ KHAN THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIRS

Land was temporarily allotted in section 2 of the Special Relief Act (I of 1877), sections 9 and 42 of the Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), section 115 declarations and litigation for possession, which had migrated from the State of Jammu and Kashmir. And the plaintiff, a fixed form, was accepted to the competent authority for the permanent allotment of the applicant and thereby the fixed amount was deposited and the plaintiff was allotted, and yet no competent authority was given to him. Did not cancel It was subsequently allotted by the Settlement Authorities in the name of the respondents through the plaintiffs filed for the land and its possession in the dispute, the trial court and the appellate court concurred with the evidence under record The matter was fully proven. The dispute was permanently allotted to the plaintiff and such allotment was never canceled. The land in dispute cannot be allotted to another person. The settlement authority will not be able to be part of the compensation pool, even after the cancellation, the land temporarily allocated for the resettlement of the J&K migrants, will be left out of the compensation pool and in the affairs of the Ministry for Allotment As it turns out, both the courts had dismissed the matter. In accordance with the prescribed law and in the revised jurisdiction of the High Court suit filed by the plaintiff, there was no unlawful / irregularity which was not declared timely, right by the courts. A decision was made simultaneously on \ r \ n tax advocates from Gari Mori lawyer