Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SADIQ versus MUHAMMAD JAN KHAN

Sections 10 and 11 of the Homeless Persons (Land Settlement) Act 1958 (Article 185), Article 185 (3), by the purchase of non-Muslim owners before the partition of the subcontinent, became owned to the extent of 1 / 3rd of the joint The residual property, which was allotted to a migrant after the partition by the respondents, was declared vacant property by the applicant, and as a settlement authority under the constitutional request of the petitioner. Property evacuation was announced. The same was dismissed by the High Court's leave to appeal that the defendants could not request the jurisdiction of the High Court as any application on the matter of the presence of sections 10 and 11 of the Landless Persons (Land Settlement) Act 1958 Was not The court had no jurisdiction to enjoy it, but it was only the deputy custodian who could declare the property vacant or irrational. UEE; The High Court's decision was based on a misinterpretation of the revenue record; if its shareholder sold more than its share in its proprietary column, at the time of the split it was always adjusted that the joint venture All co-ops were in possession until the time of partition after receiving leave to appeal such disputes raised by the applicants in the application. list of supreme court advocates from Faisalabad lawyer