Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD RIAZ versus KALA KHAN

The provisions of Sections 42, ov 54 and ov perpetual order and possession of immovable property were dismissed by the trial court on the ground of trial and evidence invalid in their name, but the appellate court ruled. Was the legal inheritance of persons with legal rights who could not afford their rights. The inheritance on the speculation and the suit will be considered to be in constructive possession of the land and cannot be justified due to the limitation and the stipulation.

Related judgments — High Court Azad Kashmir, 2013

• MEHMOOD AHMED v. MUHAMMAD BASHIR 2013 MLD 1159
• MUHAMMAD WAQAS v. AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR 2013 PLC(CS) 1165
• Syed SIBTUL HASSAN GILLANI v. AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR 2013 MLD 1191
• MUHAMMAD SADHEER v. DIRECTOR-GENERAL, LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR 2013 PLC(CS) 1205
• Kh. ABDUL HAMID v. AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary 2013 PLC(CS) 1264
• KHALID MAHMOOD v. AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary 2013 PLC(CS) 1286
• Sardar RAZA MUHAMMAD KHAN v. MUHAMMAD ASHRAF KHAN 2013 CLC 1345
• Mir AQEEL-UL-ISLAM v. AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR INTERMEDIATE AND SECONDARY EDUCATION BOARD, MIRPUR 2013 CLC 1355

All High Court Azad Kashmir judgments of 2013 →

ask a advocate free from Ahmadpur East lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes