Regln 3 2 20 2 (c) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), Sections 42 and 54 Civil Code of Conduct (V 1908), O XXXX, Rr l & 2 Suit for Declaration and Order Interim Relief, violation of building regulations The plaintiff's complaint was that the defendant had begun building six town houses instead of three, which violated the rules of the rise. The plaintiff's claim that the plaintiff had deviated from the initially approved plan and repeatedly violated the terms, its construction was demolished twice could be deliberately and deliberately tried to disregard the law. And this was probably part of a scheme to build six town houses and then double the number of regular homeowners, which could not be considered a mere violation of the existing structure, so, It was something to note that raising the town houses from three to six was the Regln 3 2 of the Karachi Building and Town Planning Regula. 20 came under 2 (c). Classes, 2002, and therefore could not be formalized in the case that the plaintiff had filed a case for interim relief because being approved and regulated by the authority could be a fundamental violation of the law and The use of the plot will change materially and will be replaced. The burden is far more than what was justified, and the same case will affect the conduct of the plaintiff and the plaintiff, and repeated attempts, intentionally and deliberately, to violate the sanctioned plate. Doing, which leads to the demolition exercises by the authority twice. Strange reversal bridge by the authority
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2012
