MUHAMMAD AKBAR THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS versus MAJOR TAJ-UD-DIN THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS
O XXI, R 10, O XXXIX, Rr 1 & 2, Articles 36 and 144 of the Special Relief Act (I of 1877), Section 53 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (X67I of 1967), of the execution of a section 42 injunction The injunction sought in this order was sought by them and the suit land was obtained by implementing the pre-photo decree but the order was later reversed so the proceedings under section 144 can be restored. Yes, the CPC merger was denied, nothing was on record to prove that the land was ever occupied. As a result of the implementation of the journal decree, it was conveyed to the plaintiffs who had submitted some amendments to the Revenue Record on the submission of a copy of the decree, which was later declared diversified by the High Forum and followed the earlier appointment order. The importation was not to be done and the revenue authorities were authorized to change the records on the submission of a copy of the decree, so they too are responsible for correcting the records keeping the same order. As the tenants were being cultivated and the question of providing for any kind of physical possession was not raised, the order was refused.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
