Articles 42, 54 and 55 of the trial and permanent, mandatory injunction for the trial court and the appellate court, together with the defendant's claim, ruled that the suit property consisted of three khasra numbers, which were in the joint ownership of the parties. And without the division of the property, the defendants were not entitled to extend the construction on any of the three measles marks in the evidence of their claims; they submitted to Patwari Halaka, examining the case of the civil court as their witness. The statement of the Patwari constituency revealed that the suit was in the joint ownership of the property parties and that there was no knowledge of the private distribution between the parties. Patwari Light's statement was sufficient to prove defendants' request for joint ownership and non-distribution of suit property. The plaintiffs had proved that the suit was in the joint ownership of the property parties and no private or official, among them. The defendants were unlawfully failing to establish any type of illegal court and the judicial jurisdictional error in illegal decisions / orders was dismissed, in which case
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2011
