WAHEED ULLAH KHAN versus MUHAMMAD HANIF
Homeless (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act 1958 Section 10 Cantonment Rent Restriction Act (XI of 1963), Section 17 Appellant's removal from a home that was transferred to the defendant while the appellant's claim for transfer Was rejected. The settlement was not challenged by the appellant regarding the transfer of the house by the High Court under the exercise of the judgment of the High Court, the final position was obtained, the appellants questioned the house. I was raised, in fact, it consists of two different things. Appellants could not be allotted two separate numbers of property as well as the same person (Respondent) ??????? Such a request was processed by the High Court and it was rejected which order was not challenged. If she went to the final position, she would not be entitled to appeal again. This dispute was rejected due to lack of open ability in the eviction process
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
us immigration advocates from Kurram lawyer
