By submitting the sale price determination of Section 24 (1), the second Proviso Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), O. VII, R 11, A. Som, the trial court dismissed the motion. Declined this amount on this amount. Gold eSum was submitted by the pre-emitter after a fixed thirty day period. Waldetti pre-emptor was claiming that the original price, according to his version, is lower than that shown in the sale change, which was bound by the second provision under the trial court section 24 (1). In order to pass a specific order to submit the exact amount of 1 / 3rd value (ZAR-E-SOM) of the Punjab Pre-Emission Act, 1991, the trial court rejected the plaintiff and approved it by the lower appellate court. It was retained. Unlawful and without legal justification, therefore, the High Court remanded the matter to the trial court, under which a specific order was passed under section 24 (1) of the Punjab Pre-emptive Act, 1991, for the second time. Has been instructed Earlier submission of the Emma torter was allowed to be submitted in due time.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012
