In section 8 and 42 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Transfer of Land Validation Act (BK) / AD46 of 1946 (XIV of 1946), section 3 suit affirmed the ownership of the oral transaction and the plaintiff asserted that the suit land belonging to his Was in ownership, exchanged. A plaintiff had a measles for ease in the clash with the measles, resulting in the family settlement that the plaintiff further claimed that the second murder killed by the defendants was illegal, invalid and unauthorized. Defendants also filed a declaration against the rights of the plaintiffs and a permanent injunction against the plaintiffs claiming that they were the owners of the suit based on the exchange, the trial court dismissed both the cases for evidence, the appellate court The appellate court dismissed the appeal filed by the defendants and accepted the appeal filed by them. Concerning the defendant's justification for the plaintiffs, the lawyer claimed that the second exchange was an oral transaction and in this regard, no title was obtained for the plaintiff. The dispute was canceled because it was true that Rs 90 except the registered documents. No more than property can be transferred, but especially in the Dogra Regime in Poonch, State of Kashmir, even the transfer documents were not valid by transfer, unless countered by the Maharaja, in the present case. In the meantime, it appears that the parties have made oral exchanges to avoid this complication, however, the defect If no stand on this announcement recovered. Azad Jammu and Kashmir Transfer of Land Validation Act, 2003 (BK) / 1946 Act, 2003, which is an unregistered transaction
