Section 13 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), AXXI, Rr 97 and 98 Constitution of Pakistan in their possession of the disputed property after 1963 and emphasized that the judgment against them was against the withdrawal approved by the debtor. The order cannot be processed, the court upheld the objection filed by the petitioners and dismissed the order of one of the applicants. The holder filed an appeal which was allowed by the appellate court and the proceedings were remanded to the court as instructed to proceed with the case, while the appeal filed by one of the applicants was dismissed. They were not implemented. In spite of the fact, as a party to the eviction request before the rent controller, the applicant was in possession of the disputed property which is fully on record as a third party in the petition for eviction. Was never enforced, despite the fact that the decree holder knew that the property had been in dispute for several decades. Only acknowledged the possession of the applicants but also believed that they were not enforced as a party to the application for enforcement The applicants were neither tenants of the order under any contract / contract nor were they legal There were tenants and the enforcement of the rent controller could not be executed. The Applicants High Court also allowed the other review petitions, along with the constitutional petition, against the disapproval decision approved by the appellate court.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
