Possess
Possess legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Words 'bachelor', 'degree', 'possess', 'possession' and 'rank', explained.
"Possess", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/38789
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Possess"
P L D 1959 (W
THE STATE‑Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD ZAKI and another‑Respondents
Court:1969 P Cr
YUNUS MEAH‑Petitioner Versus ABDUR RASHID AND 7 OTHERS‑Opposite‑Parties
Court: DaccaP L D 1959 (W
Arbab MUHAMMAD KHAN and another‑Petitioners Versus (1) Arbab MUHAMMAD HASHAM KHAN and
Court: High Court1984 M L D 169
ACHAR and 6 others — Appellants Versus AHMAD and 3 others — Respondents
Court: Karachi1992 S C M R 1610
NOORA and 11 others‑‑‑Appellants Versus ALI and 3 others‑‑Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan1993 C L C 454
AZIZUR REHMAN and 10 others‑‑‑Appellants Versus ALI HAIDER SHAH and 4 others‑‑‑Respondents
Court: Azad J & KP L D 1989 Lahore 103
ANJUM and 2 others‑‑Appellants Versus Mst. SUFAIDAN and 3 others‑‑Respondents
Court: ‑‑‑S. 48‑‑Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S.28‑‑Execution of decree when not to be required‑ ‑Co‑sharer in possession failing to execute decree for possession‑‑Effect‑‑Where a party was in possession of property, execution of decree was not required at all‑‑Such decree though not executed, yet would be alive and effective qua those rights acknowledged therein‑‑Limitation bars only the remedy, but does not extinguish the right itself unless such case falls within ambit of provisions of S.28, Limitation Act‑‑Person in possession of property has no need to sue execution for possession thereof‑‑Plaintiff being a co‑sharer, even if found to be in possession of land less than his/her entitlement in joint Khata, her right to the property cannot be extinguished, because possession of a co‑owner is, in law, possession of all co‑owners‑‑Co‑owner's right cannot be extinguished unless his exclusion for the statutory period was established from such ‑property. p. 105 BP L D 1983 Karachi 510
FARID KHAN-Applicant Versus ATIQ UR REHMAN AND ANOTHER-Respondents
Court: Art. 144-Adverse possession-Question whether person holding possession 12*years before cause of action arose-Finding of fact-Courts below after assessing evidence of parties and having discussed same in detail concurrently finding against appellant-Courts below in view of contradictions in evidence of applicant coming to conclusion that applicant was not able to prove his case of adverse possession-Burden, held, lies on party claiming adverse possession-Party proving title to property (open land) presumption, held, will be that he is in possession of property as true owner-Open land-Burden lies entirely upon person who claim adverse possession to prove that he had been in contemous possession of 12 years-Such possession, held, should be in continuity without any break-Person claiming adverse possession must establish by cogent, clear and conclusive evidence that he has continuously been in possession for whole of statutory period and that his entry was with intention to assert such title-Person proving his title to property burden, held, shifted entirely upon person claiming adverse possession to prove same.-Burden of proof.P
MUHAMMAD SARWAR‑Defendant‑Appellant Versus FEROZ KHAN and another‑Respondents
Court:P L D 1964 Dacca 498
JOGENDRA CHANDRA KAPALI CHOWDHURY AND ANOTHER‑‑‑Appellants Versus ARJUN CHANDRA KAPALI AND OTHERS — Respondents
Court: