GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN versus SYED GHULAM HAIDER SHAH
Sections 4, 12, 18, 19 and 54 Determining the amount of compensation for acquisition of land The referee court's reference to the appellate collector had clearly stated that the reference to the ban at the time of the petition in respect of the court was clearly in reference to the court. Was out of bounds. There is no opportunity for the collector to approach the district judge for further action after the same action when the time-bound collector is obliged to apply his mind whenever, on a reference, to his The same reference was requested from the court for commitment. It had to use it with open eyes in the manner prescribed by the provisions of the law, in order to overcome the terms of reference and to comply with it the collector had an interested party. This application should have been filed by such person for the resolution of disputes under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the application should be within the prescribed time limit, as the appropriate referral should be filed with the Land Acquisition Act. Must comply with the conditions set out in Section 19. The Collector 1894 had to see if the reference / application was not filed within the stipulated period, then the Collector was ordered to revoke the same period in section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, the Collector's decision. Later in 1894, when the reference was banned, the district judge had no opportunity to proceed on the matter and his refusal could not be declared illegal where the reference was declared invalid. Yes, then the option has to be optioned. This is how to become equally unclean in the eyes of the law
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
