Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ASGHAR versus MUHAMMAD AKRAM, M(G) BO R

Sections 42 and 44 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act 1967 had approved the land record by the land in favor of the vendor containing some measles numbers, but after that the applicant made any appeal or view against the order canceling the acceptance. Secondary was not inserted. Approved in the review, because the variable was eventually canceled, said the measles number is displayed in the record of revenue in the name of the seller, during the stabilization operation, the same measles numbers were not challenged to the vanci because the consolidation officer was entitled to appendix authority by Wendy. Was declared. The area he purchased from the shopkeepers, but the shopkeepers have surrendered the area in favor of the respondents, the appellate authority observed that in exchange for the designated measles numbers, the respondents were allotted measles numbers. It would be appropriate and appropriate to do so. Finally the Appellate Authority was terminated before respondents were wrong in holding the vendors entitled to the allotted measles numbers because those deficit numbers acknowledged that the original vendors did not represent the land previously purchased by Wendy. However, it could actually claim new measles numbers instead of the original measles numbers. Vendor advocates from Chiniot lawyer