Section 42 of the Special Relief Act (of 1877), Section 42 affirms the plaintiff's ineffectiveness and effect, as well as a permanent injunction with respect to the disputed land, claiming that he was not the owner because of the tenant in possession of the disputed property. Were. The same and alleged alteration to the separation of the disputed property was the result of fraud and separation with Halaki Patwari because it neither contested with the defendant nor was certified according to the law nor the same. Another lawsuit was filed in connection with the disputed property. He purchased the said property in 1981 for Rs 30,000 and the alleged alterations were filed with the consent of the plaintiff and the trial court pronounced the decision of the plaintiff's suit and the Court of Appeal of the plaintiffs in the appeals court. Case dismissed. The trial court's verification of the change in accuracy was incomplete, lacking the thumbprint of the unverified, unverified and signed EWAN and Seller / Seller Person to present any document of any such nature. It was necessary to verify the document after completing the various documented formalities, which had to be done by the Revenue Authorities and there was no credible other than that. Reliable evidence that is available on record that could potentially support the defendants' case or show that the disputed property was sold / transferred by the plaintiffs. The defendants agreed with the High Court to interfere with the results. Refused.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
