Find a Lawyer

SAHIB DINO versus MUHAMMAD SUBHANI

A. VIII, R11 Specific Relief Act (of 1877), 5 42 plaintiffs were occupying agricultural land, 50 of which were plaintiff's property and the balance belonged to the government, due to the eviction, the property deputy commissioner. Subsequently, a clearance certificate was issued in respect of the said property in favor of the defendant against his claim, and the defendant stated that the property was filed by another person claiming that the deputy commissioner's order was illegal and that he had a permanent To be dismissed and the order of the Member, which the Board of Revenue has certified, the order of the Deputy Commissioner should also be set forth by the Respondent. The petitioner filed a motion to dismiss on the basis that the plaintiff was not charged for any reason. The plaintiff in the filth was based on the deputy commissioner's illegal allotment of land and his right to acquire it according to the law because he was his green. In the circumstances, it cannot be said that there can be no reason to prosecute for filing a suit which cannot be said to have not been properly framed or the plaintiff sued or rescinded. There were all questions that could arise if there was a cause of action in which the plaintiff was required to pay the plaintiff under Order VII, R 11, CPC. Instead of rejecting, there should be an opportunity to fix the said defect and remove the deficiency. Complimentary relief cannot be granted under the law, prayer can be accepted as free for restraint or relief may be granted at all times. top advocates from Kurram lawyer