Section, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Applicants / complainants allege that he was a tenant in the premises and upon the defendant's request that some punk after breaking the premises in his absence. Elements Removed Articles Police had formally investigated the FIR filed by the applicant and the police had submitted a report for canceling the case under the C Class Magistrate, agreeing with the police recommendations Went and summarized under the CRPC order. The revocation of the FIR passed by the magistrate was finalized because the applicant did not challenge it before any competent court law as the applicant had filed a complaint against the defendant under the Unlawful Settlement Act, 2005 The complaint was lodged under the same and the trial court rejected the same justification. At the time, he was in the underground residence as a tenant, even though he had not challenged any of the tents before. The competent court had failed to establish the applicant's case, the trial court rightly dismissed the complaint under the Unlawful Settlement Act, 2005, the trial court's unwilling order cannot be interfered with.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2012
