NAZIR AHMED versus ASIF
The applicants of the Kachhi population claim on the principles of section 2 (c) (d) and 3 restoration of occupation claim that the defendants had deposed the property in question but the trial court dismissed their application. To show that he was the owner or occupier of the property within the meaning of Section 2 (c) and (d) of the Unlawful Settlement Act, 2005, or in the absence of any document in which, by law, Shows the applicant's title or occupation as the occupier. In question, the High Court could not be accessed under the jurisdiction to review the claim that it was a legitimate occupant, nothing illegal was found in the order passed by the trial court.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
famous high court advocate from Wana lawyer
