GOVERNMENT OF SINDH THROUGH SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, KARACHI versus ABDUL GHAFOOR KHINCHI
References to Articles 6, 18, 23 and 54 Determination of Compensation The Respondents of the Referee Court are dissatisfied with the award given by the Land Acquisition Officer; a petition was made under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Officer for reference to the court. , Which was rejected on the grounds that it was badly banned. The Land Acquisition Officer ordered the district judge to dismiss, which was considered a reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and was filed because such reference was to be given by the collector and to someone else. By no means and upon the request of the interested person who did not accept the award, after rejecting the defendant's request, no reference was made to the court by the Deputy District Officer nor any opportunity to do so. Was received because reference requests were rejected. The record showed that the order to dismiss the request for reference was not sent to the court by the Deputy District Officer, but the order itself was filed before the rest of the District Judge, who made Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The same reference was acknowledged as a reference, and further action was taken, an order dismissing the request for reference filed by the defendant in the court, no reference under section 18 can be made. In the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, there was nothing in the circumstances that he did not provide for repeated reference to the law in the same case before he made a determination, and the aforementioned illegal district judge Yes, it had no jurisdiction under the circumstances.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
