Find a Lawyer

AHMAD SHER versus MUHAMMAD HAYAT

A. XXI, R 10 and Section 115 of the Punjab Pre-Emission Act (I 1913), Section 4 and 21 pre-emption proceedings were filed by the defendants, with the claim that the sale consent order in their favor Canceled by name The trial court dismissed and the appeal filed against it was dismissed by the plaintiff, however, the High Court ruled in the review and trial by the High Court, and the order passed by the High Court, the Supreme Court, the defendants. Was sustained by Submitting a review request before the Supreme Court, as well as a similar objection to canceling the sale through the previous order, filed an objection before the Executive Court, which saw its final decision up to the Supreme Court, But the execution court issued the possession warrants under this decree. By issuing a warrant of possession under the High Court-approved order of the plaintiff, the objection petition, which, on its face, was unreasonable, is believed to have been rejected by the implementing court. After the mandate of the Supreme Court, no further decision / decision was required on the same issue, after both the courts had abolished the lace as per law, there was no interference in the amending jurisdiction of the High Court. Granted, there is no illegal interference / irregularity of any kind under section 115 of the law; the CPC has been compiled by the Executive Court or the Court of Appeal; the request for review is substantiated. Was deleted Pakistan, top advocate family court from Sambrial lawyer