In accordance with Articles 8, 11 and 12 of the Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), O. VII, R10 of the Special Relief Act (I of 1877), the declaration of return of the section 42 case, two courts ordered the return of the plates. The North-West Frontier Province came under the jurisdiction of the District Court under Section 11 of the Waqf Properties Ordinance, 1979, the lawyer representing the defendant (Department of Defense) claimed that the North West Frontier Province was sued by the defendants. The Property Ordinance was targeted in Sections 1 and 21 of 1979. And while the two courts below were factually ordered to return the plaintiffs to their tricks, their case was that the disputed property was separate from the one in the said notification, even before the appellate court. I found this thing. In the light of the details of the property in the notification, the department did not hold long enough to issue the disputed property. The CEO made the notification and allowed the plaintiffs to not only enjoy it, but also to rebuild and rebuild the demolition, and this was the first time, in 1989, when the Department of Defense noted Managed the presence of one of the property's tenants. The issue of jurisdiction of the civil court was already pending in his favor and the most appropriate way for the trial court was to allow the parties to include their own evidence on all contested matters and with it Make the decision, including the matter itself. Jurisdiction At the end of the trial, the plaintiffs did not prove that the disputed property was part of the aforesaid notification or dedicated property.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2010
