YOUSAF HAROON versus CUSTODIAN OF EVACUEE PROPERTY, AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Sections 3 and 18 (2), in the interest of the respondents, the allotment of the vacant property professional claimed that the land in which he was occupying was allotted. And after 5 years of allotment in his name, the appellant's father received the allotment in his name from the jurisdiction of the department, without canceling his name, saying that in this case, the multi-bridge allotment against the appellant's father. The action is pending before the judge. The allotment rehabilitation commissioner said that the allotment was subsequently restored in favor of the appellants' father's allotment and in the interest of the defendants, saying that the verdict was upheld till the High Court. The land was allotted first in the name of the father of the appellants, while the allotment was made in the name of the appellants in the interest of the respondents which was secretly canceled without first canceling the allotment in the name of the petitioner. Allotment was made in favor of the defendants in the interest of the defendants in the year 1950, after the legitimate allotment and that was the first land allotment. I am in favor of the father of the ultimatum appellants, looking after the law made without canceling the first allotment.
Related judgments — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir, 2014
