Find a Lawyer

SULTAN versus MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN

Section 42 of the Transfer of Property Act (I82 of I82), Sections 122 and 123 suit for the execution of the gift plaintiff who had father, son and daughter in their case challenged that the change in the gift allegedly the defendant / plaintiff. Executed in favor of Claimed that the gift was the result of fraud and misrepresentation in question, except that the donor's son and daughter were minors at the relevant time and that the donor had no legal authority to give the gift and that the gift To their extent, the invalid suit was dismissed because of a trial delay, because the dispute gift gifting was challenged approximately 26 to 26 years after its execution when ID cards and other documents and oral evidence. The plaintiff's daughter and daughter-in-law had fully proven when the gift allegedly changed and executed. It was confirmed that they were both minors, illegal dealing / separation of immovable property by minors, even if it was made by their legal and natural guardian, except where such property was held. For the need of the minor, in such a situation there is no such status, the property of the minor which he inherited from his mother and was exchanged for them. His father had gifted the gift in writing by his father, in the circumstances against the rights of minors / plaintiffs was absolutely void and ineffective in the dispute, although the majority of the three years upon attaining age The minors did not challenge, but could not be ruled out, as the defendants claimed. when you need a advocate from Haripur lawyer