Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD KHAN AND OTHERS versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB

Increase more food schemes for Section 10, 24 (b), 30 and 36 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), Section 9 Special Relief Act (of 1877), Section 42 suit declaration for allotment of land under such scheme and to the claimant. Capture delivery. In March, 1957, the Government decided that the land be resumed for auction, whose tenancy had expired on or before Rabi, 1962, by the plaintiff under such policy. To cancel the restoration order, his tenancy should be void. The delivery of such possession commenced on the date of delivery, and the period of five years, if calculated from the supply of possession, would extend beyond Rabi, 1962 by the Civil Court for the absence of civil court jurisdiction. The appellate court dismissed the case, which was decided by the superior. The court's validity suit land was not available and could not be resumed because the five-year fixed period was to be completed after Rabi, 1962, thus, there was no question of lease expiry, the government Such an election was abandoned. Icy decision and it has been decided that under this scheme all the allottees are entitled to proprietary rights irrespective of the date of allotment and the termination of leave order, thus, the civil court has jurisdiction. No restrictions can be imposed. In the present case, the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the High Court and the Appellate Court, reversing the decision of the Civil Court, following the implementation of the Government's instructions on the delivery of proprietary rights in accordance with letters and spirit. \ r \ n \ r \ n immigration advocates phone number from Jalozai lawyer