Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SHAFIQ versus MUHAMMAD BUKHSH

Section 21 West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), Articles 39 and 42 Specific Performance of Contract for Sale of Incomplete Titles (Record of Rights) The plaintiff asserts that the shopkeeper was the owner of the suit property on the basis of the allotment. I was a division. In his favor, the plaintiff, who executed the sale agreement in favor of the plaintiff, denied that ownership and said that the property in Jambandi was the property of the provincial government, even though the jambundi was presented. The trial court relied on the division on this entry. The person's suit was not reflected in the jambandi suit and was upheld by the appellate court. The claimant was required to present proof of proof as to whether the title was legally transferred to the disputed property. The integrity of the university from the provincial government to the seller was justified because it directly proved the defendant's defense that there was no title to the seller in the disputed property which the appellate court sought. The decision passed could have been delivered by a sale agreement. Failure to read the records and ignore the material evidence resulted in decisions and orders made under the two courts as a result of illegal exercise of jurisdiction and were set aside. \ R \ n \ r \ n inheritance advocates near Dijkot lawyer