Find a Lawyer

SULTAN AHMED versus MUHAMMAD ILYAS

Section 117 West Pakistan Land Revenue Rules, 1968, RR64 & 67Aland Record Manual, Paras 4 1 & 4 Land Settlement Manual, Paras 255, 256 and Appendix VII Specific Relief Act (of 1877), Section for Occupation Claimant 8 The suit claimed to be the owner of the land located in Mouza \ G estate, while the defendant Ali claimed that the two tenements were owned in different temples \ R \, the property owned by the parties was located on the Barry Ndry Line. The plaintiff's two mojaws were among the cases. Defendant invaded his land 14 The defendant stated that he was occupying only the land he owned, with two measles numbers and that the plaintiff had made a claim made by the Deputy Tehsildar. The alleged assertion was that not only was the information in the custody of the Tehsildar wrong because it was made without informing the Defendant, but also because the Deputy Tehsildar prepared only the relevant information during the preparation of the report. account was taken into account when the disputing parties were of the same nature which included the land in both the defendant's temperaments and Revenue officer in such a situation was to follow the law in 5 West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 1967 117 West Pakistan. Land Revenue Rules, 1968 The Validity Parties agreed that the appropriate method for the plaintiff would be to refer to the appropriate Revenue Forum so that the settlement was made in accordance with the law regarding two grounds for the present evidence based on the plaintiff's case. Can't hear. The court did not have the power to prosecute that the appellate court correctly set aside the trial court's decision and set aside the suit. inheritance advocates near Kala Bagh lawyer