As mentioned above, the SIPOA agreed. But it had been Erroneous to do so. It wasn't the SIPOA’s spot to unilaterally abandon the easement, given that other functions had Unique property desire in it – particularly, the proprietors of heaps 21-28 that benefitted in the drainage easement. Property lawyers in https://rafaelzijoe.slypage.com/31670707/rumored-buzz-on-co-ownership-and-partition-advocate-in-karachi