Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD IFTIKHAR KHAN versus FAZAL AHMAD

The trial court dismissed the trial for a section 42 lawsuit, but the appellate court overturned the trial court's decision, claiming litigation, which owns 1/4 of the shares in the suit property. Was neither sold nor separated from its relevant section. Measures number to anyone, the name of the nominee plaintiff, appeared in the column in the entries in the Revenue Record, appeared in the suit property ownership column during the fraud, the title of the plaintiff was rejected by the Revenue Officers. That is, no fraudulent record can be challenged at any time by the plaintiff in the Revenue without any action because the rights of any person cannot be considered solely because the property is further separated from the owners. Because there was no evidence of transfer of rights in the suit property. By the plaintiff he was entitled to 1/4 of his share in it, the appellate court below properly appreciated the evidence and properly applied the law to the appellate court below without being found guilty of any defect. Nod decision, revision against appellate court decision without merit, dismissed, in circumstances criminal advocate from Naukot lawyer