SYED AHMED ALI SHAH versus RAJA MUHAMMAD AKHTAR KHAN
Sec & 42 & 54 54 The suit for the plaintiff's claim and injunction was that the suit property belonged to her late father, who died in 1991, because the plaintiff, her two brothers and a widow were her legal heirs. It was alleged that the defendants had entered into the Knowledge Suite property with their names in the record of legal heirs / rights with and without them. And that the defendants claimed ownership of the property in connection with the claim that the defendants claimed that they had purchased the suit property through the plaintiff's father during his lifetime, obviously the property of the suit. The first was owned by the plaintiff's father who appointed the plaintiff's brother. His lawyer and asserted that the attorney sold the property to the accused through the act of sale, which is registered, the initial burden on the plaintiff is that he claims the sale to the plaintiff despite the other side claiming to be a sale transaction. Wants to stay in favor of His title was affected by the sale transaction between him and the plaintiff's father through a lawyer during his lifetime, the defendants brought to record the actions of the messenger obtained in his favor and with him He also recorded the statement of the deceased owner's lawyer, who was the brother of the plaintiff. The plaintiff in connection with the sale transaction not only failed to prove it in the suit in respect of the suit property but also failed to identify any illegality in the court's refusal decisions under the trial court, as well. The Court of Appeal discussed the material on record and returned conclusions on merit that no basis for interference was available. Of the trial court and the \ appellate court
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2010
