Section 13 student victim and student of Ashdod Proof Plaintiff, the seller's brother claimed that he was in permanent possession of the suit land but Khasra Garwadi's view proved that the disputed land was not in the possession of the plaintiff but by some people. It was being cultivated. The plaintiff did not examine them in support of the case of another person who was a tenant under the shopkeeper Sayed Tenant, so the defendant himself was aware of the story set by the plaintiff when he learned of the plaintiff's sale. In taking possession of the land covered by / with the plaintiff, the trial court's defendant admitted that he had sent the first notice of the accused to the defendant at some point even though he knew he was living on the place. Which has failed to comply. The plaintiff, in the circumstances, failed to prove the victim's objection, in accordance with the requirements of section 13 of the Punjab Pre-Emission Act, 1991, the ordinance with the law \ 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.
