Find a Lawyer

SHERA versus HAJI SARDAR KHAN

Section 30 Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Article 144 Limitation Stating Point co-operatively sold the land orally in the joint kits through 7 oral transactions and 7 5 changes to 22 5 1967, 13 12 1968, 25 1 The changes passed on 1969 and 27 10 1969 were reviewed and canceled and on 13 197 10 1973 a stable change was confirmed. The suit for pre-authorization was filed on 28 9 1974 and it was decided on 28 5 1978 that the case of oral sale as per the original proceedings in the case was in the years 1967 1968 1969 and the land under the sale was purchased by the buyers. The actual physical possession of the property was, therefore, started to run on the dates mentioned under Section 30 Punjab Pre-Emission Act 1913, and a respondent appearing as a witness was temporarily banned from the case filed on 289 1974. It is admitted that the appellants occupied the land for nineteen hundred and said that the measles was dependent on the wow as well. He was. Initially approved amendments showed that the vendors had sold the land to an unincorporated joint mortgage, meaning that the sale was in every measles number that reflected certain measles numbers through measles. Is. Or that the plaintiff's statement that the defendants had occupied some of the land since 1969 cannot be accepted as possession under the sale because some part of the combined suit was not actually capable of physical possession. attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Chicha watni lawyer