Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SADIQ versus TAJ MUHAMMAD

Constitution of Pakistan 1973 Article 172 The confiscation of immovable property respondents claimed the last male owner of the property for having a sexual relationship with her and even the last male owner of his widow who was non-Muslim, before creation. He was killed in Pakistan and his widow later converted to Islam. Respondents could not prove their relationship with the last male owner or his widow, as they could not find any credible evidence , Could not include oral or documentary documents, in which case the respondents did wrong search. The late male owner and his widow were the suicide of the deceased woman who succeeded in the deceased's estate because there was no liberty to sell, gift, exchange or view as a limited owner and thus the widow. Could not justify any part of the disputed land. The applicant, who claimed that she would be hanged by a widow in favor of the legislative applicant, even though she is fou could not, in fact, act in her favor because she was being treated as a transferor of such disputed property. There was no authority, right or entitlement, and neither of the parties has any right or entitlement to any disputed property, nor does anyone know of any right to be entitled to it in court, Article 172 of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 The same stand has been made with the state under: [Mohammad Law] famous lower court advocate from Kot Bunglow lawyer