Find a Lawyer

ABDUL AZIZ versus IMAM BAKHSH

In the case of Sections 2 (d), 6 and 13, the transaction was not a matter of simplicity, as the transaction was limited in view of the alleged exchange of property between the parties in question. Section 2 (d) of the North West Frontier Province Pre-Impression Act, 1987, which indicated the nature of this transaction as a permanent transfer, had to run from the date of sale, ie the date of confirmation of the change, the sale. Registration of a deed, transfer transfer sale or any other means of sale cannot be considered a permanent transfer simply by recording the transfer statement because, as a transfer transaction, the sale consideration payment is finalized to the sale. Cannot be considered formating Similar land may be exchanged in adjacent enclosures canceled prior to final confirmation of variability. The plaintiff was unable to prove any other method of transfer of occupation or any other form of permanent transfer. Prior to the date of confirmation of the change, no coordination had been made before the confirmation of the change and premature lockout was made. The case was filed four days after confirming the variance based on the validity and the Tolbay's evidence. This was a defect that did not comply with the requirements of the students after the sale was finalized through a permanent transfer, as made clear in section 2 (d) of the North West Frontier Province Pre-Impression Act 1987 Before the time was up, the Appellate Court's order of the Impeachment Court was not a restraining order. Placed aside and the plaintiff's case dismissed. r \ n property advocates from Chak Jamal lawyer