Keeping aside the offer of rental offer during the proceedings, the plaintiff submitted a letter issued by the Security and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP), setting aside the interim order of provisions & 54 and Inter 54 To prove that he was in the underworld and based on that letter. , The lower appellate court directed the parties to hold the status quo, the validity and validity of the SECP letter is yet to be determined, and such letter does not have the legal effect of reducing the tenancy in favor of the plaintiff. Because it could not be that the plaintiff had. The first party proved that he was a resident tenant in the dispute No offer of compromise could be reluctant because the offer was always considered without prejudice and did not amount to any kind of confession. The plaintiff was a tenant under the plaintiff having previously failed to file a lawsuit. In the absence of dispute and its absence as a tenant in connection with the premises, no legal case can be excluded for the temporary injunction, the fact that the premises were demolished and Construction is underway as required by the Local Government Notice, and any stagnation order would be akin to disappointing an action taken by the Local Government in the public interest. The High Court refused. In order to maintain democratic discipline in relation to a recognized dangerous building, thereby endangering properties and lives, the Supreme Court has approved the order passed by the appellate court-approved state under consideration.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009
