Find a Lawyer

CUSTODIAN, EVACUEE PROPERTY OF AJ & K versus RENT CONTROLLER

Sections 3, 7, 22 and 23 of the Pakistan (Administration for Evacuation Property) Act, 1957 (v. 1908), 0 1, R10 Independent 1 Clothing and Kashmir Rent Restriction Act, 1986, Offer Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim The VII VII of the Constitution Act, Section 44 eviction or any designation of property accessories shows that the applicant's inaction as a party to the pending proceedings before the appellate court effect record shows that the property The question related to, was not treated by any maintenance authority or custodian as an evacuation property. The time before the legal date is January 1, 1957, after that crucial date after which no person or property could be considered a removal proceeding, which began in 1993 to vacate the property, ie the important date. Was after January 1, 1957. The appeal against the application of the unnecessary and unauthorized application by Custodian is pending before the Appellate Court for the execution of such property, pending the application of such property to them, was the necessary party , The appellate court Custodian rightly dismissed it as having been denied the right to behave in the matter of property, after the important date there was no such right to entertain or to continue the claim. Refusal to formally apply Custodian in proceedings before the Appeal Court does not face any legal or constitutional weakness, such as the order in question on the request of any person best law firms from Skardu lawyer