MUHAMMAD ESSA versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH THROUGH DISTRICT COORDINATION OFFICER
Section 42 and 12 for 12 Declaration, the case was passed in favor of the plaintiff, before the plaintiff regarding the suitable land, the effective plaintiff claimed that the plaintiff was forcibly expelled by the plaintiff. had gone. The claimant's sale agreement with the original vendor / owner came to an end when his claim of specific performance against the owner proved that the decree was still in the field in favor of the claimant and had been finalized and This has affected the suit land and its binding. The parties concerned failed to challenge this decision, therefore, the plaintiff, therefore, was the legal owner of the suit land that was sold to the plaintiff, then the name of the claimant in the transfer The transfer was based on the statement. The record of rights was illegal and the result of his inclusion in the registered sale deed and revenue record in favor of the accused was illegal and liable for the cancellation, any legal notation of registration by the registration register There was no cost, because the TPD had no such legal authority where the basic document of any transaction was found to be illegal, then the entire series of documents executed would also be considered. Without deciding the injunction in favor of the plaintiff as invalid and invalid, the decree cannot be suspended by order in another case. The plaintiff already knew of the sale in favor of the claimant and consciously and deliberately purchased the suit land so that he could not take advantage of the interested buyer's transaction without notice.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014
