Find a Lawyer

AMANAT KHAN AND OTHERS versus NOOR-UR-REHMAN

Article 42 Land Reforms Regulation, 1972 (MLR 115), Para 26 West Pakistan Land Reforms Regulation, 1959 (MLR64) Declaration of Civil Court Title Jurisdiction, Principal Plaintiffs Claim That Suit Land Was allotted under interest. The Martial Law Regulation, 1959, and the defendants' 1919 1993 allotment were fraudulent, fraudulent, invalid and unconstitutional on their rights The trial court dismissed the case on the ground that it was protected by law. Was stopped, but the appellate court rejected the rejection. The trial court was remanded for judgment on the jurisdiction of the ordered jurisdiction; the trial court's order passed by the defendants in the trial case was reinstated as the jurisdiction of the civil court was restored. Was not prevented because the order was unlawful by the authority and the suit in favor of the defendants under paragraph 26 of the Land Reforms Regulation 1972 was not available for allotment, only available to the public or if it was eventually known It was reported that the land surrendered under the Martial Law Regulation No. 1959 was used and leased. If there is nothing else to deal with under the Reform Regulations 1972 (MLR 115), the allotment order dated 19 6 1993 clearly falls outside the jurisdiction of the Respondent Civil Court. Because the court of full jurisdiction has the initial jurisdiction to determine whether a tribunal of special jurisdiction acted within the limits set by the legislature. If this is the Constitution of the Civil Court top civil advocates from Sakrand lawyer