MAJOR GENERAL DR. ASIF ALI KHAN versus NIAZ ALI KHAN
Sections 42 & 54 54 The Case for Declaration and Permanent Order The defendant sought to declare that he had purchased the suit house through a registered sale deed and was the exclusive owner and claimed that he had Under the license, the occupants occupied the house. When he refused to vacate the premises since he was convicted, one of the defendants filed a separate lawsuit to declare for his influence that the name of the sale registered in favor of the plaintiff Was anonymous and that the defendant is entitled to 1 / 8th of the inheritance in the interests of the parties before the two cases were consolidated and the trial court dismissed the case filed by the plaintiff and the plaintiff. The trial filed by the plaintiff had appealed against the verdict and the decree passed by the plaintiff at the trial proved that He denied that he had enough resources. The homeowner's trial court's finding could not be sustained for reasons that were in the interest of the forefather, during his age, Ortiz never charged the case as anonymous. He died 23 years after the sale, but no legal heir can claim that no one can accuse him of anonymous financing, with the intention of shopping with each other's mind. Was made with the positive use of. That the trial was proceeding with some consideration other than the judiciary, and relied on aspects of the case that were legal and illegal and
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2010
