Find a Lawyer

HAJI ABDUL SATTAR versus FAROOQ INAYAT

Section 10 (1) Evaci Trust Property Transferred to the Chief Settlement Commissioner, the scope of vacant trust property located in an urban area, provided for the June 1964 and June 1964 discontinued dates in accordance with Section 10 of the Disclosure Trust Property (1975). Previously, if trust property related to urban or rural vacancies were used against validated claims (PTDs), they would be treated as Chief Settlement Commissioner Permanent, respectively. The transfer agreement was legally transferred. In the present case, the plaintiff was released in the year 1964, so the suit cannot be treated as property (located in the urban area) as the property appeal of the eviction trust was excluded accordingly.

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2013

• MUHAMMAD INAYAT GONDAL v. REGISTRAR LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE 2013 PLC(CS) 1480
• ALI MUHAMMAD v. State 2013 SCMR 1484
• MUHAMMAD ASLAM v. AUDITOR-GENERAL OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD 2013 PLC(CS) 1487
• Engineer IQBAL ZAFAR JHAGRA v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN 2013 PTD 1491
• SYMPHONY (PVT.) LTD. v. Haji FAZAL KARIM 2013 SCMR 1497
• GHULAM RASOOL v. MUHAMMAD SHAFI 2013 SCMR 1501
• LUCKY CEMENT FACTORY LIMITED v. The GOVERNMENT OF N.-W.F.P. through Secretary, Local Government and Rural Development Department, Pe 2013 SCMR 1511
• MIRZA BOOK AGENCY v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, LAHORE 2013 SCMR 1520

All Supreme Court judgments of 2013 →

lawer from fb area from Sambrial lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes