Find a Lawyer

MOSAM SHAH versus MIR PIYAO KHAN ALIAS PIYAO KHAN

Border Tenancy Act 1950 Section 49 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional Applicants As a shareholder in underground land, a specific amount of money was issued in return for production in which they were given their share. To the extent of Dec. The question was maintained to the level of the applicants regarding the accuracy of the Board of Revenue, in the context that the respondents also had some property related to the (applicant's) share and they were not giving them any produce. Likewise, they were not entitled to a production decision in relation to the property in question unless the suit was for payment of the suit was not a suit for division of the account, even if the applicants were so entitled and if the application If they advise operators, they will also bring a case for production recovery. The second argument that the preliminary injunction was a prerequisite in such a case was not correct the suit was merely for the purpose of obtaining the production, not for the presentation of Eve's n. Should have been raised earlier and could not be raised for the first time in the constitutional petition that the constitutional application was rejected for disagreeing with the tribunal's unanimous results. top advocate from Mohen Jo Daro lawyer