In sections 8 and 42 of the Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), O. VIII, R1, the defendant in the interest of the plaintiff filed a declaration and occupation claim on the basis that he was the owner of the disputed land but heard in the record of the rights record. 1964 65, his land was shown to the proprietor in the interest of the defendants and the said error was subsequently claimed against the defendants in the jumble petition. However, in 1984 he made a statement that he had increased the disputed land during exploitation and if he found out that he had occupied more land than he had purchased, he would give up possession of it. It was found out that he had taken possession of the land according to his rights, the case was dismissed, the two sides prayed to the trial court to appoint and limit the constituency of Patwari. The report should be summoned and the parties bound. The same trial court pronounced the decision of the plaintiff's appellate court on appeal, allowed it and set aside the trial court's order and injunction, and obtained remand for remand of the case. The defendants claimed that the original case was on 5 kanal of land, 14 marshals and references were made in respect of the disputed land but the trial court amended the plant in 19 1985 to acquire 51 kanal of land. Was obtained and at the same time, written statements were sought for approval of the decree on this land. Validity records reveal that an order was sought to capture the land of 5 Kanal and 14 Marla in the original plant but filed on 19 9 1985
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
