Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD IMRAN versus MUHAMMAD SHAFIQ

Sections 6 516A and 1 561 have been ordered to abolish vehicle privileges. The applicant had filed a petition against the trial court order under which the superintendent of the vehicle was handed over to the defendant in the dispute, the applicant claimed that the original owner of the vehicle had moved it in his name. The other person / transfer and said that the transfer was transferred in the name of the applicant instead of transferring the respondent to the respondent to whom the vehicle was handed over to the superdiere, who claimed that he had transferred the original owner's transfer. The contract was purchased on the basis of this. Which applicant claimed to have purchased the vehicle in dispute, neither the stamp seller's name nor the original owner's signature / thumb mark on the reverse side and did not indicate that it was For what purpose the paper was purchased, saying that the transfer process was without issue, the identification card number of the original owner transfer deed produced by the applicant was found to be fake and incorrect and the open transfer deed prepared by the respondents, The date of the issue was disclosed, showing the name of the buyer and the name of the person in whose favor the vehicle was purchased. I bought it, said the transfer agreement appeared in the original document vehicle. The dispute was fully established that the applicant's name was transferred on the basis of fake documents and in the circumstances the respondents were rightly handed over, the applicant filed an invalid reading in an anonymous order filed by the applicant. Or non-reading or even judicial defect was not identified. Under Section 1 561A, the CC issued a high online advocate from Hunza Nagar lawyer