Find a Lawyer

SYED MUHAMMAD BAQIR SHAH versus MST. ISMAT KHATOON

The trial suits of cases 4, 5, 16 and 21 were heard by the trial court, but the appellate court overturned the trial court's findings on some cases and excluded the points set out in the second appeal. ? Whether any of this transaction is related to a shop that was not previously vacant and whether there was a practice of evacuation in the area where there was already vacant property, the plaintiff claimed that no One of the shop-related transactions that was not vacant, while the claimant asserted that no shop was built by the seller or the seller and in fact it was proof of the passage of the house, as evidenced by the record. Proved that the shop never existed at any time before it was sold in favor of the claimant / seller. Through the vendors, the trial court correctly found in the circumstances that the transaction was already vacant and in view of the authentic facts and legal position on the record, the appellate court below did not say that it was permissible to reverse the trial court's findings. ? On the basis of the notification, the matter was restored on the basis of notification regarding the existence of customary custody. The concerned persons have been raised. It is believed that there was already customary custody in the area where the case was pending. The appellate court was located below the appellate court, hearing that the underground area was outside the old city limits and said that the area had increased. And because of the fact that the custom was in the old city, it would not be an extension because it exists in the area of expansion as well as the trial court best advocate from Sehwan lawyer