ABDUL MAJID versus CHIEF SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, LAHORE
The constituents of Section 10, taken by the petitioner in Pakistan (1973), Arts 185 (3) and 1994, stated that the CH form they submitted was not disposed of, and that they transferred the claimant to the property. Is entitled to a review petition before the Settlement Commissioner has been disputed and he has directed the High Court to vacate the form which was removed on the basis of Laches. The petitioner himself disclosed that he had been in possession of the property for 30 6 1959 and was informed in 1975 that no revision was filed by him. The case is not pending so there is no case pending on the merit, otherwise the Supreme Court's appeal for further investigation was denied.
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
advocate for immigration from Khoski lawyer
