Find a Lawyer

MUTAZIM HUSSAIN versus STATE

The property rental agreement in conflict with Articles 145 and 561 of the Criminal Code (CRPC) on the possession of immovable property shows that the applicant was occupying the disputed bungalow as a tenant and Occupation was administered by the civil court, where the status quo was issued from time to time, which was in force until 4 1988. The respondents were fully aware of the civil suit for the permanent injunction and the status quo was ordered by contempt of court against them as the respondent filed his affidavit. Action was taken under section 145 under 18 11 1987, in support of which, the CCPC was started on 24 12 1987, the station was already regulated by the civil court, started by the police. The proceedings were clearly deemed illegal and unacceptable. Section was illegal by the DM and proceedings were stopped in cases with no legal authority best advocate from Haveli Lakha lawyer