Respondent respondents accused of fraud in favor of Articles 42 and 164 of the West Pakistan Land Revenue Act 1967, appealed to the collector but the failed commissioner remanded the case to the collector, new decisions The order of the Records on Remand for Demand shows that the change of occupation and payment of consideration was a lack of money which was established by the order of the Collector and even by the Commissioner when such fact was recognized. An alleged fraudulent magistrate inquiry into the passing of an unidentified order also revealed that the defendants were fraudulent and fraudulent. As I was hunting him. Nothing was compensated, the criminal case under section 20, petition, PPC against the applicant was also being heard, thus ignoring the essential provisions of section 42, West Pakistan Land Revenue Act, 67 of ofter. The sale was reportedly a matter of sale because the occupancy change and consideration were not paid. Failure of the courts below to take the entire action at the relevant time
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
