Find a Lawyer

MST. AMIRAN MAI versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB THROUGH DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MULTAN

Article 36 of the Special Relief Act (of 1877), Article 42 of the Civil Code (v. 1908), the title bar declaration of the jurisdiction of section 115 civil courts in the interest of the plaintiffs allotted to the subordinate courts Source fact-related findings were canceled. The order of the Collector and the cancellation was upheld by the Board of Revenue Plaintiffs, the order passed by the Revenue Authorities in the civil suit was heard, this order was a breach of the facts, the trial court ruled under Section 3636 of the Colonization. The case was excluded based on the option. The judgment and order were upheld by the Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912 and the Appellate Court. The civil court courts could not review the question of jurisdiction and legality of the order passed by the Revenue Authorities under the provisions of the Government Land Colonization (Punjab) Act. , 1912 The Civil Court was not qualified to entertain the matter, even if the order approved by the authorities was found to be invalid. The dependency of a civil court cannot be relied upon as a justification of the litigation \ The civil court can see the dispute only if the ordering authority was authorized under the provisions of the Government Land Colonization (Punjab) Act, 1912. , So that such a decree can be approved. Failure to read and misrepresent any readings by the two courts below, together with the facts and law discovered by both the courts, the orders passed by the Revenue Authorities were given with them. Not wrong, using jurisdiction law websites from Mailsi lawyer