Find a Lawyer

PAKISTAN DEFENCE OFFICERS HOUSING AUTHORITY, KARACHI versus DR. SYED TARIQ SOHAIL

Section 42 Sue and property description for declaration is different from the description of the process and the limits described in the site plan Wendy claims the property based on her boundary, the seller cannot sell and the seller may buy more area Could not move. The shopkeeper will not have the right to Wendy to mention it in more work and the vendor has moved, the vendor cannot claim to take advantage of the scope in detail, especially when the dimensions of the area are precise. Described in the Site and Site Plan Principles.

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011

• MUHAMMAD SHAHNAWAZ v. KARACHI ELECTRIC SUPPLY COMPANY through Company Secretary 2011 PLC(CS) 1579
• MUHAMMAD HASHIM KHOSO v. State 2011 PCrLJ 1580
• BHAMBHO KHAN v. State 2011 PCrLJ 1590
• ORIENT COLOR LAB (Pvt.) Ltd. v. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, CUSTOMS VALUATION, KARACHI 2011 PTD 1594
• ABDUL RASHID v. ABDUL GHANI 2011 MLD 1597
• GUL BEG v. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION KAMBER 2011 YLR 1598
• MEGA INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL BANK CO., LTD. v. F.T. SELNES 2011 CLD 1602
• MISRI v. MUHAMMAD SULEMAN 2011 YLR 1603

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2011 →

patent advocate from Khyber Agency lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes