Section 53 Once admission to the Revenue Record was found to be illegal, the previous registration would be considered in accordance with the standings during which the claimant owned 119 shares, which were later divided into two fields, in which the plaintiff's name was Kivats. One was dropped and the result was a drop. The error of the land in their possession continued till the consolidation took place and the suit land from which the plaintiff was deprived was included in the plaintiff's report prepared by Patwari Establishment and the Circle Patwari's statement was recorded. And fully supported the plaintiff's claim of ownership in the previous case in this regard, however, the written statement only raised the objection that the mutation was fraudulent once it was found that the admission was illegal Has been changed to, it is assumed to be the old correct entry. The ever-present courts held that since there was no denial of their original ownership in the record, the plaintiffs of the former women would be adjusted accordingly after correcting the entries. \ R \ n \ r \ n
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
