In the Lim Lim Limitation Act (IX of 8 1908), Article 2020 Su suit of derivation limitation decision for the plaintiff changed the plea that it was an anonymous transaction and that their interest in the interest was the real owner. , The trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, but the lower appellate court rejected the same restriction, rejecting the limitation in which the limitation was settled, the matter was settled in the year, 1967, and the defendants. In the interest of the defendant, within 6 years the defendant can file a challenge title in the interest of the defendants, while a case was set up under it. The plaintiffs filed the case on 1892 1992, 35 years after confirming the change in question, although in the initial history of the case, the plaintiff sought to improve the mere record of revenue. Wanted, but in Gadaz and Madina, they challenged the change in question. On the basis of the anonymous transaction suit filed by the plaintiffs, the lower appellate was properly held by the court, as time-barred, since the case was filed beyond the six-year fixed period, the High Court concluded. Refused to be displayed
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
