Find a Lawyer

MIAN SHAUKAT ALI versus NOOR AHMED

Section 8 suit for property defendant acknowledges that he is the owner of the suit property and his ancestors before it was the plaintiff claiming that the defendant was a knower and because the defendant was defective. The plaintiff, therefore, gave him suitable property for 8/9 years of residence. Before the lawsuit was filed, the claimant opposed the suit and claimed that he and his ancestors had occupied the property for several generations and that he was the owner of the excise and taxation department. And the plaintiff further claimed that the power and gas connection in his name also the plaintiff admitted that the defendant's name was appearing in the public records as the owner of the suit property, but then on his request There was a change in the ownership of the name, the testimony of a witness presented by the defendant, the effect was on the order from the Department of Excise and Taxation. Plaintiff's signature on the summons issued with the intent to imply that the plaintiff's testimony was false without the knowledge of the plaintiff when it appeared in court when her own witness testified that her plaintiff's influence was credible to the plaintiff The absence of a witness was in dispute with them, and their testimony cannot be trusted. Developed by the plaintiff, the plaintiff's contents were denied and he clearly stated in his clear inspection that the defendant had been occupying the suit property for a very long time and that it was mentioned by the plaintiff in the plaintiff. For a relatively short period of 8/9 years, not to prove your case; online advocate from Wana lawyer