Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE versus SHAMLAT DEH VILLAGE KAMALA BHAG THROUGH MUHAMMAD RASHEED

Article 175 Special Relief Act (of 1877), lawsuit for declaration and injunction by Articles 42 and 54 for the defendant and for compulsory injunction by the defendants common Shamlat / common property on village common property. Two suits containing questions about law and facts. In both cases, the same decision was made between the same parties and in the same case, the plaintiff's decree demanded that he be the owner of the Av Haveli of the population in the village. Protect Disposal and Disaster Defenders Under the mandatory injunction it was claimed that the plaintiffs (in the first suit) on the village common ground \ Shampuron, which was used as a village pond, on the illegal terrace. Was prosecuted. Appeal against the order to abolish construction has failed for the last 20 years, while defendants claim that the land occupied by the defendants is part of a sublet of land that was left for a village pond, Forced construction by the defendants The plaintiff requested that the defendants intend. Their drainage system passed through the suit property and they dug out - a moat for the purpose which clearly indicated that the village pond was filled to the brim with the plaintiffs and they The Collector's Report had both convincing prices and decisions. On the basis of this, the courts did not commit any unlawful action in the prosecution of the plaintiffs. The two courts below were not misplaced, the suit of the plaintiffs was dismissed for redress. online advocate from Sheikhupura lawyer