AJMAL RAFIQUE versus PUNJAB COOPERATIVE BOARD OF LIQUIDATION, LAHORE
Section 7 (c) (and 11 Registration Act (XVI of 1908), Section 60 (2) of the Law) on the evidence (10 of 1984), Article 17 (2) (a) Registered Cell Deed by the Manager on 26 6 1991 Hanging in favor of the petitioner - Disapproved corporation request in 2004 to obtain the NOC from the Punjab Cooperative Board of Prevention for cancellation of such sale process by the board for execution by an unqualified person. There was nothing available on record to prove to the shopkeeper that the sale process was done in accordance with the law - to show that the corporation's managing committee had established its own RARAD has approved the manufacturers authorized by the Corporation's Managing Committee to carry out the sales process on behalf of the Corporation W. Prior to this, they were given the option of assigning options. Nor was it assigned to such manager that the statements of witnesses regarding the place and time of payment offered by the applicant were inconsistent with the Petition did not inspect the other minor witness and The local commission that committed such sales was unsuccessful. Prove that there is an agreement with the defaulted corporation. That such a manager had the option of executing a sales deadline. And he considered the sale. Such an agreement was made on 26 199 1991, when the cooperative scandal had already come to the surface or was the final authority to review matters relating to defective societies, which had not been finalized and Nevertheless, the High Court dismissed the application in the circumstances
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
