MUHAMMAD KHALIL KHAN versus AJAIB KHAN
The respondent, who claimed to be the landlord of the premises by purchasing the Cantonment Rent Restriction Act 1963 Section 24 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Appellant, requested that he had a contract of sale with the former landlord and that he was the owner of the house. There was no tenant like it was in possession. But the partial performance of the contract and its case is already being heard in court when the eviction proceedings were continued by the controller of rent until the decision of the tenant, consistent with the appeal against the halt to the rental process, was granted. The order for the controller to continue with the removal process will be intermittent. Such an interim order, where no appeal is applicable, can still be challenged in the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court in this order, which is interim in SCMR 741 of the Supreme Court, 1984. The appeal against the order was not dismissed. [Appeal)
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
law firms from Ratto Dero lawyer
