Find a Lawyer

QUDRAT SHAH versus MST. NASEEM AKHTAR

Section 42 The plaintiff for sale sold the suit property through a mutation which was affirmed in favor of the defendant who had transferred some of the said property further. And it seems that no prejudice was caused by it. The plaintiff failed to prove its claim through convincing, reliable and conclusive evidence, while the defendants rejected its claim through solid evidence, while the courts below raised the factual dispute. The plaintiff had failed to make any illegal identification through false reading and non-reading of evidence. The following courts had passed reasonable judgments and revised the decree.

Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2014

• GHAZI MARJAN v. State 2014 PCrLJ 1750
• Mst. RUKHSANA YOUNAS v. AZIZ-UR-REHMAN 2014 CLC 1751
• GUL SAMBER KHAN v. SAYURAJ 2014 MLD 1753
• MUHAMMAD FIAZ v. State 2014 PCrLJ 1764
• KHALIL AHMAD v. Mst. AZMAT ARA (Widow) 2014 YLR 1782
• MUSHARAF KHAN v. NAIMATULLAH 2014 MLD 1786
• Mst. SAADIA TABASSUM v. Malik MURTAZA 2014 YLR 1786
• ASIL ZADA v. BAEZZAT KHAN 2014 PCrLJ 1787

All Peshawar High Court NWFP judgments of 2014 →

best law firms from Samma Satta lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes