Home Maxims & Terms Ejectment Suit meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Ejectment Suit

Ejectment Suit legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

1982 SCMR 1056 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

S. 106-Ejectment suit-Petitioner denying respondent's title in property-Such denial, held, operates as forfeiture and dispenses with notice under S. 106-Acceptance of rent after forfeiture, held further, would not show an intention to treat lease as subsisting.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Ejectment Suit", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/15063

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Ejectment Suit"

CLC 1984
Writ Petition No. 2948 of 1983, decided on 10th March, 1984.

1984 C L C 1316

ATTA MUHAMMAD‑Petitioner Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
CLC 1986
Writ Petitions Nos1142 and 1143 of 1981, heard on 19th March, 1986

1986 C L C 1448

Mst. SAT BHARAI and others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (Rev.) and others‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
PTD 1994
Income-tax Reference No.280 of 1986, decided on 19th June, 1991.

1994 P T D 44

SWAIKA OIL AND PRODUCE CO. (P.) LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

Court: 201 I T R 520
CLC 1990
Writ Petition No. 3218 of 1990, decided on 16th May, 1990.

1990 C L C 1587

NAWAB‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (R), LAHORE DIVISION,

Court: Lahore
CLC 1993
C.R. No.242‑D of 1991, decided on 29th March, 1993.

1993 C L C 1409

Ch. HAMID ALI ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Ch. REHMAT ALI and 5 others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore
CLC 1984
Writ Petition No. 1967 of 1982, heard on 22nd November, 1983.

1984 C L C 2400

LALA‑ — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, SAPGODHA DIVISION,

Court: Lahore
PLD 1979
ADDL. SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, REVENUE ETC.-Respondents Writ Petition No. 518 of 1978, decided on 16th October, 1978.

P L D 1979 Lahore 709

Before M. Dilawar Mahmood, J Versus ADDL. SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, REVENUE ETC.-Respondents Writ Petition No. 518 of 1978, decided on 16th October, 1978.

Court: -- R. 7-Interpretation of statutes-Retrospectivity-Legislature altering rights of parties by taking away or conferring any right of action-Such enactment, unless expressly made to apply to pending actions, does not apply to pending actions nor affects them-Exception: Where enactment merely affects procedure and does not extend to right of action-Law and notification impugned not laying down their operation, to be retrospective and appeal also not being a matter or procedure but one of substantive right, right of appeal as provided by para 7 of Rules, held, continues to vest in petitioners and their case to be decided according to law as it existed when ejectment suit filed.-Interpretation of statutes-Appeal (civil).
YLR 2019
N/A

2019 Y L R 2800

MUHAMMAD ASHRAF and another — Petitioners Versus ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (REVENUE), RAWALPINDI DIVISION and others — Respondents

Court: Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench)
CLC 1994
R.O.R. No. 52 of 1991 decided on 9th January, 1993.

1994 C L C 893

MISRI KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus GHULAM MUHAMMAD ‑‑‑Respondent

Court: Board of Revenue Punjab
MLD 2002
Writ Petition No.327 of 1994, heard on 9th October, 2001.

2002 M L D 1350

HUKMI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MEMBER (JUDICIAL II), BOARD OF REVENUE PUNJAB, LAHORE and another‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Lahore