Find a Lawyer

RABOO versus ABDUL REHMAN

The second appeal of section 54 & occupancy suit, occupancy profit and permanent injunction was made on the basis of the present case the entire building was gifted, which was not proved by the claimant and the fact was suppressed when the plaintiff. This title was not proven. The property or the rights or the owner of the property, as its owner, was subject to a misdemeanor case, completely misunderstood without declaration of title and was not enforceable in law, the conclusions of the two courts below. Was kept separate.

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010

• KHAN MAALIK v. KHALID BASHIR 2010 PLD 162
• MUHAMMAD RAMZAN v. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION JAM SAHIB, NA WABSHAH 2010 YLR 163
• JANTAN BIBI v. State 2010 PCrLJ 164
• OPTIMUS LIMITED through Manager Human Resources v. REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNION, SINDH through Joint Director Labour South 2010 PLC 166
• FORBES FORBES & CAMPBELL CO., through Company Secretary v. EBRAHIM TRUST through Managing Trustee 2010 PLD 170
• IRFANUDDIN v. PAKISTAN STEEL MILLS CORPORATION (PVT.) LTD. 2010 YLR 170
• ZAIN-UL-ABIDIN v. State 2010 MLD 173
• REHMATUDDIN v. REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNIONS, GOVERNMENT OF SINDH 2010 PLC 174

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2010 →

famous supreme court advocate from Wana lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes