Find a Lawyer

LIAQAT ALI AND OTHERS versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE

Section 8 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) was filed by the plaintiffs claiming the eviction of a permanent transfer order, Department of Excise and Taxation, on the basis that they sought recovery of possession. Their forerunner is in the best interest. He was the owner of the property and in his evidence a record of the Excise and Taxation Department was prepared which the suit rejected by the trial court but the appellate court allowed the appeal and the case was pronounced and The High Court upheld the order passed by the appellate court. The plaintiff's doctrinal jurisdiction was that the plaintiff failed to produce documents to prove that they had a proprietary interest but the High Court, under the false impression, considered it to be the owner of the property on the basis of a permanent transfer order, However, according to him, no such transfer order was presented to the trial court, as he had no proprietary rights in respect of the controversial property on the basis of PT1 issued by the Department of Excise and Taxation Defense. And further claimed that the proprietor's ownership in PT1, issued by the Excise and Taxation Department Currently can not be considered evidence. The interest given by the plaintiffs on behalf of the plaintiffs was that a permanent transfer order was issued in the interest of their predecessor and in pursuance of the documentary evidence presented by the Department of Excise and Taxation, their interest in The predecessor was proved, the appeal was granted by the Supreme Court considering the satisfaction of both parties. top advocates from FR Peshawar / Kohat lawyer