KALA KHAN TAREEN, COAL COMPANY DUKI versus MEHRAB KHAN
Illegal Settlement Action under Sections 3, 4, 5 and 9, Scope Complaint by the Complainant under the Illegal Settlement Act, 2005, was dismissed by the trial court upon receipt of the complaint by the trial court ? In order to investigate the matter, the relevant Section H, who, after hearing the parties, submitted their report and the trial court, dismissed the complaint, a legal complaint was made under the section of the Unlawful Settlement Act 2005, which is a special The law was and will be controlled. Generally, the dispute between the parties regarding the property and mining was long under dispute when the two parties were suing for different forums and the result was no special order on the record. And the settlement of title was outside the scope of the proceedings initiated under the Unlawful Settlement Act, 2005, the decision regarding title and ownership, in the circumstances, had little effect on the proceedings under the provisions of the Act only. Which was important to consider, and the decision given was to affect the occupation of the bereaved, without any excuse. On the other hand, in the present case, although the complainant claimed to be in possession of the property in question, neither in the complaint nor in the petitions disclosed the exact date of settlement. Where the complainant was expelled, no precise measurements and no boundaries of the complaint were specified. He did not allege that he deprived the entire leased area in his favor. This way, the property owned is not specific
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2010
