Sections 3, 4, 5 and 7 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (v. 1898), Section 265K, were charged with preventing the possession of illegal property by illegally occupying the property of the complainant. Also demolished. The individuals were that they were the owners of the same petition for transfer of the same accused under section 2K, K, CCPC, for their failure to own the disputed property, but they were dismissed by the trial court. His circumstantial evidence specifically claims that he purchased and seized the land during the period 2003 to 2007, and in his absence in May 2007, the accused illegally seized his property. And demolished a built room and changed the shape of the earth. In Housing Society, illegal alienation started in the interest of justice not to end the proceedings because there was apparently enough police report that was not final and had no binding effect because the complaint was decided by its own Will be based on merits and the evidence will be forwarded. Both sides and the accused will have full opportunity to include their version in defense. The circumstances of the present case deserve to be dealt with briefly and the underprivileged person will also be entitled to take advantage of the offender under another law. There are no restrictions. The Unlawful Dispossession Act, 2005, as section 2 (3) was clear in this regard, therefore, the civil suit did not impose any restriction on the part of the parties under the special law, which precluded the amendment.
