Find a Lawyer

MST. GHULAM FATIMA versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB

Section 22 Homelessness (Land Settlement) Act (XLVII of 1958), Sections 22, 25 and 4 of the vacancy of the property to be taken under the Code of Conduct and thereafter by the Settlement Officers in any matter Was a prerequisite to deal with. If a property or property is not treated as an evacuation property prior to 1957, then this property cannot be considered as vacant property thereafter. The Allies, in the present case, failed to produce any evidence. Custodian / Settlement officials dealt with the question before 1951 as an empty property. The revenue records also did not support that the property was ever considered empty property, and entries in the record of the revenue in the form of jambandis clearly showed that the land in dispute was owned by a non-vacant owner. Is considered property and, at the same time, the property is not treated as a vacant property and is not shown in special jurisdictions and is not taken into consideration in the pool of compensation, any migrant claimant or non-claimant principles. Could not be allocated. \ r \ n \ r \ n lawer from fb area from Rahwali lawyer