Find a Lawyer

ABDUL SATTAR versus LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR HIGHWAYS DEPARTMENT

Section 23 asserts that the higher rate of compensation paid by the landowner for the acquisition of brick kiln on his land, as well as the lack of commercial evidence to prove that the applicant owned The land is superior to other land around it. Applicants' claims to prove the exact location between their land and the road were dismissed under the circumstances. \ r \ n \ r \ n

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2010

• UNITED WOOLLEN MILLS LTD\'. WORKERS\' UNION v. UNITED WOOLLEN MILLS LTD. 2010 SCMR 1475
• EXECUTIVE COUNCIL, ALLAMA IQBAL OPEN UNIVERSITY, ISLAMABAD v. M. TUFAIL HASHMI 2010 SCMR 1484
• CHAIRMAN, STATE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION v. HAMAYUN IRFAN 2010 SCMR 1495
• SHAKEEL AHMED v. Mst. SHAHEEN KOUSAR 2010 SCMR 1507
• JUMMA v. State 2010 SCMR 1530
• FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Housing and Works, Islamabad v. ABRAR AHMED 2010 SCMR 1537
• MUHAMMAD ABDUL MOIED v. GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Works 2010 SCMR 1546
• SUO MOTU CASE NO.9 OF 2010 2010 SCMR 1551

All Supreme Court judgments of 2010 →

famous high court advocate from Hala lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes