Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD RAZAQ KHAN versus MST. SHAMIM AKHTAR

Section 39 of the Transfer Property Act (I82 of I82), Section 454 of the Evidence (10 of I 984), Article 114 suits for the cancellation of the sale deed estoppel appellant in its suit to cancel the sale deed in relation to the suit property. The trial court ordered the order. , But the appellate court rejected the trial court's ruling and ruling, dismissing the litigation, the land in dispute was gifted to the appellant by his real uncle, and the uncle then moved to his other brother and the appellant. Sold in favor of advance interest in interest with the seller. There was ample evidence on record of the appellant's consent to the sale of his share of the respondents; all three vendors, including the appellant, were subordinate to the Registrar for the registration of the execution of the sale deed in favor of the respondents. Submitted that the document was filed in the presence of the appellant and, as an adult and mature person, did not object to the sale of the respondent / van by his real uncle to the seller. Occupation of the entire land, including the appellant's part, the appellant's presence and information as to the shopkeeper / s Submitted to the borrower, all vendors, including the appellant, have deliberately transferred the land and the defendant / seller, with mutual consent in favor of the appellant, to illegally sell the provisions of Article 114 of the Convention Paused to challenge, 1984 will come to the rescue of the respondents / vendors who will expel the appellant to bring the case against the respondents and continue the appellate court order and appeal against the decision. Permission attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Phagwar lawyer