nullity, and that its or relied upon, even at the stage of
execution and even in collateral proceedings. A defect of
jurisdiction, whether ... appellant in execution. It is already held that it is the
11
Controller under the Act that has exclusive jurisdiction to order
ejectment
sought to be enforced
or relied upon, even at the stage of execution and even in collateral
proceedings. A defect of jurisdiction, whether ... appellant in execution. It is
already held that it is the Controller under the Act that has exclusive
jurisdiction to order ejectment of a tenant
sought to be enforced or relied upon,
even at the stage of execution and even in collateral proceedings.
A defect of jurisdiction, whether ... appellant in execution. It is already held that it is the Controller
under the Act that has exclusive jurisdiction to order ejectment of a
tenant
sought to be
enforced or relied upon, even at the stage of execution and even in collateral proceedings. A
defect of jurisdiction, whether ... appellant in execution. It is already held that it is the Controller
under the Act that has exclusive jurisdiction to order ejectment of a tenant
sought to be enforced or relied upon, even at the
stage of execution and even in collateral proceedings. A defect ... appellant in execution. It is already held that it is the
Controller under the Act that has exclusive jurisdiction to order
ejectment of a tenant
sought to be enforced
or relied upon, even at the stage of execution and even in collateral
proceedings. A defect of jurisdiction, whether ... appellant in execution. It is
already held that it is the Controller under the Act that has exclusive
jurisdiction to order ejectment of a tenant
