Sections 15 and 28 of the Punjab Pre-Emission Act, 1913, defendants / shopkeepers resisted a premature trial alleging that the premature order in favor of those claiming to be self-tenants on the land in the dispute. It has been admitted that such persons were applied in this case as they were rejected by the accused in the case. The trial court, however, found in the appeal the order of the collector, who was the father of one of the collectively acquitted shopkeepers and the mortgaged of the suit, and thus could not be tenant. Was violating pre-Peter Peter and Article 28 and thus it has no effect and will have no authenticity.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
