Find a Lawyer

NOOR TIMBER IMPORTERS versus DEEN MUHAMMAD & SONS

Loans for Agricultural Purposes Act 1973 Section 4 (3) West Pakistan Land Revenue Act (XVII of 1967), Section 42, 164 thick gauge validated by Validity Bank had taken advance loan against agricultural land, mutation which did not enter mutation It was later admitted and the petition was approved by the bank petitioner's predecessor, who had been given such a loan, had filed a lawsuit in his life that the other lender had sued the bank staff And he neither applied for the loan nor was it approved, but his claim was withdrawn. Petitioners were excluded as successors in the interest of the lenders, although they did not deny the thumbprints of their predecessors on the various documents, yet they filed a fraudulent request to avoid the responsibility of their former lawyer. Carried forward. When the change in approval was rightly indicated that the mutation had not received a title and should have been entered as the loan was raised, this may have been due to slowdown by the bank officials and revenue staff. A summary process of this change cannot be investigated by a Certified Revenue Officer, who verifies complex and complex questions of law and fact. The fraudulent application was properly filed and affirmed in a competent court of law because of its nature-affecting mutation direction. online advocate from Fateh Pur lawyer