The defendant, who filed a Section 42 lawsuit, claims that he is the legal heir to the slain husband of the saleswoman, who has sold the "precaution" in dispute with the defendant. The defendant purchased the suit on behalf of the seller women through a suit sale registered. The distribution of property rights on the basis of the transfer deed registered by the municipal committee was present on the record, saying that the modification was approved on the basis of the registered document and the document gave the rights to the controversial hat auctioneer who was selling. The mother is not a woman nor her husband. The defendant whose claim to be the legal claimant was granted proprietary rights even nine years after the death of her husband Lady, said Ahata in favor of the defendant through a registered sale deed and that the sale process Proprietary rights were granted in exchange for the rights of the owner / seller and the registered work by which he was given proprietary rights was challenged by the plaintiffs in his case when the document on which the seller's rights were based The change was approved, it was not challenged, so the sales mutation in favor of the defendant cannot be challenged. Yes, the mutation was not inherited by the plaintiff, the vendor suit filed by the plaintiffs was misunderstood, even if an initial allotment was made in favor of the deceased husband of the shopkeeper. Until he breathed his last and his widow fulfilled all the conditions and then he was granted proprietary rights. Under his appellate court, it was not permissible to decide the appeal for the plaintiffs.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012
