NAZIR AHMAD versus COMMISSIONER, GUJRANWALA DIVISION, GUJRANWALA
Cancellation of Section 10 and 11 of the Allotment of Land Disposal (Land Settlement) Act of 1882 (Sections 10 and 11 of the Property Act, 1882) will remain in the High Court, even though the fake documents of the certified claim are rejected. The cancellation order was not implemented in the revenue records and the land allotted in interest of the allotted successors was sold; in the favor of the applicant, the revenue record in the case of cancellation of tax allotment was corrected. Claimants claiming value acquisition and residual protection under Article 46, Property Act, value 18 value under UST payers are land value very much the buyer can not ask the question. The allotment of land cannot be strengthened nor can life become illegal. As a petitioner, Alotti was relieved of his right to take possession of the land under the question that he himself was not entitled to inheritance, his successor could not give the applicant a better honor on fraud and wrong. The whole basis can be ruled out by the statement and no superstructure on it is necessary. No law can force fraud, forgery, and forgery to build civil rights on them. Under equal jurisdiction, it would not be appropriate to protect the product of fraud and the fraudster was not entitled to such protection, under section 41, transfer of the Property Act 1882.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
