Section 42 and Title 54 The title and the evidence of owning it were concurrent with the cases filed by the plaintiffs by the courts of adjudicatory facts together: the trial court and the lower appellate court ruled in their favor. Was. There was no widespread publicity in the possession and auction of the suit plot, which was the only word against the plaintiff's request while the plaintiff proved his case that the grant of the suit plot in open auction was in accordance with the law and that Was in control of From the same year, the plaintiff of 1973 also complied with the terms of the grant, the accumulated value of the plot and such entry was also kept in the village form. The letter of acceptance was also issued to the Record of Rights of the plaintiff and Ijzanama The plaintiff also did not obtain a "no objection certificate" from the Town. Except for the Committee, the defendants did not participate in the auction proceedings, therefore, they could not raise the question of legal status or the holding of the auction. Tied by the Assistant Commissioner and the Divisional Commissioner's High Court, certifying the exercise of jurisdiction, refused to interfere with the final outcome of the facts by the two courts.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009
