Find a Lawyer

GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY BOARD OF REVENUE, BALOCHISTAN QUETTA AND OTHERS versus MUHAMMAD ALI

Articles 42 and 54 of the Civil Code of Conduct (v. 1908), restriction of the appeal of Articles 96 and 115 Public Property Public Works, the plaintiffs' negligence demanded the title against the suit property, which the Forest Department prosecuted. The trial court dismissed the appeal in favor of the plaintiffs against the trial and the decision of the trial on the basis that the lower appellate court had completely restrained its boundaries, after reviewing the merits of the trial. In its jurisdiction, the court refused to interfere with the decision. It was through the petitions approved by the lower appellate court that the decision was not made on the merits of the appeal before the lower appellate court, therefore, due to serious defects and failure to perform legal obligations promptly, The merits of the case should not have been removed from the High Court's endorsement. And within the stipulated period of limitation by all persons concerned in the case, there was no real loss, loss or loss of rights to the public workers involved in the case, in the trial court, but the government and The forests were completely deprived of public property which was intended to be used, used and disposed of in the public interest only. The government and the department as its proprietors were a public property, the trial court's order was not placed before the lower appellate court within the stipulated period and for this reason the appeal was dismissed. The court also maintained. As a result, the government lost a lot of property due to its proximity and hence the people immigration advocates contact from Shamsabad lawyer