Supreme Court Azad Kashmir — Judgments of 1982
29 reported judgments of the Supreme Court Azad Kashmir from 1982.
- K. H. KHURSHID v. REFERRING AUTHORITY 1982 CLC 485
Section 151 reads with the order of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Supreme Court Rules, 1978, OV, R11 (28), disqualifying the appellant / applicants from being elected or elected by a Member Assembly or Counc…
- CH. SADDAR DIN v. CHAIRMAN REVISING AUTHORITY M. D. A. 1982 CLC 637
Section V 44 False Decree neither deals with the merits of a matter nor after applying the mind to the relevant facts and merits of the matter nor does such an order neglect the principles of natural …
- ANSAR AHMAD KHAN v. ALI MARD KHAN 1982 CLC 822
Applicants are awaiting a decision in the appeal filed for the durability of the two parties who have occupied the same piece of land through a separate suit, with a separate suit, while the defendant…
- PIRAN DITTA v. CUSTODIAN OF EVACUEE PROPERTY 1982 CLC 832
Section 42 was read with the Rehabilitation Act 1956, the Section 12 Rehabilitation Commissioner Hearing Case was transferred to the Revenue Commissioner, taking the file rather than handing it over t…
- MAQSOODA BEGUM v. BOSTAN KHAN 1982 CLC 884
A divorced man made life worse by having his wife severely abused.…
- MUHAMMAD MANZOOR v. REHM DAD 1982 PCRLJ 894
Applicants charged with possession of illegal property in Article 145 and 561 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CRPC) for possession of immovable property were the second floor. Section 145 provides for…
- SYED ASGHAR HUSSAIN SHAH v. THE STATE 1982 PCRLJ 907
Section 491, Section 2, 59 8t 73 of the Criminal Act (XXXIX of 1952) on writing a note in response to the disclosure of a questionnaire about the Habeas Corpus Petitioner, a citizen, who has been char…
- SHAH MUHAMMAD v. CUSTODIAN, EVACUEE PROPERTY,'MUZAFFARABAD 1982 CLC 917
Section Ag 44 Controversial Parties in Occupation of Controversial Parties Controversial parties that seek legality before the property and withholding applicants from the Rehabilitation Authority in …
- ABDUL MAJID v. THE STATE 1982 PCRLJ 948
Criminal Code of Conduct (CCPC) Section 497 bail applicant, who has been accused of abusing a married woman and adultery petition, however, has allegedly claimed abduction from his wife. And in order …
- INAYAT KHAN v. THE STATE 1982 PCRLJ 1000
Criminal Code of Conduct (CRPC) Section 497 Bail [Case of Murder] The victims have no fatal injury attributable to the applicants, from the joint responsibility of those involved in the trial to the a…
- MUHAMMAD YUNUS v. THE STATE 1982 PCRLJ 1001
Evidence, the trial court appreciated the applicant's conviction under Section 341, the Code of Conduct, for which he was not cheated by the police at all, unless otherwise provided by section 341. Th…
- MUHAMMAD ARIF v. THE STATE 1982 PCRLJ 1002
Criminal Code of Conduct (CR PC) Section 497 Bail [Murder Case) FIR has been lodged with the accused applicant while under investigation and the police challan applicant has a joint responsibility und…
- SARDAR KHAN v. THE STATE 1982 PCRLJ 1003
Criminal Code of Conduct (CRPC) Section 497 Applicant of bail, charged with assaulting the complaining party and responsible for hurting serious and easy wounds with a sharp weapon and brutally beatin…
- ABDUL GHAFOOR QURESHI v. THE STATE 1982 PCRLJ 1022
Determination of precautionary detention detention authority cannot be passed to the Review Board for further detention of deteno before the expiry of the three-month preliminary term. More detentions…
- MUHAMMAD HANIF v. AZAD GOVERNMENT 1982 PCRLJ 1030
Criminal Code of Conduct (CCPC) Section 491 read with the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance 1981, Section 3 habeas corpus precautionary detention despite the illegal investi…
- JALAL DIN v. MUHAMMAD ASLAM 1982 CLC 1282
OVI, r 17 Read with amendment to section 153 on alcoholism The plaintiff attempted to correct the error by adding a survey number included in such land before formally vacating the entire land. Plaint…
- MUHAMMAD SARWAR v. FAZAL REHMAN 1982 CLC 1286
Sections 101, 106, 108 and 114 of the burden of proof are the principles of burden of proof and the principles considered, the burden of proof closely, which is on the lie and when it is exchanged [th…
- MAKHAN KHAN v. GHULAM RASOOI 1982 CLC 1307
Section 42 appeals to the Supreme Court to uphold the challenge to verify the High Court order and proceed on the validity of the reasoning, which was refused to interfere with the decision of the Fir…
- AKSAR ALI v. FAZAL KARIM 1982 CLC 1309
The powers of the High Court regarding Section 100 Second Appeal are, in fact, open to a false attack of law, if it is not supported by any evidence or if there is any irrational and misunderstanding …
- SADDAR DIN v. CHAIRMAN, REVISING AUTHORITY MIRPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 1982 CLC 1439
Section 44 and the New Mirpur Town (Land Allotment) Act, 1964 allotment plot was properly allotted to the applicant who obtained possession and paid the full price, on appeal against the allotment cha…
- GHULAM HUSSAIN KHAN v. ASEELA BEGUM 1982 CLC 1709
Cross-examination of the witness by reading section 145 and 146 of section 155 is testimony from the evidence given by the witness whether the call to him is unwarranted or contrary to his expected st…
- ALI MUHAMMAD v. HUKAM DAD 1982 CLC 1712
The third old rule of section 90, concerning the requirements of natural justice, which has been raised under section 90, must be intimated to a party so as to reject such a felony. Evidence can be pr…
- SEERAT COMITTEE, MUZAFFATABAD v. CUSTODIAN OF EVACUEE PROPERTY 1982 CLC 1720
Sections 2 (3) and 7 (1) with respect to the evacuation property are also interested in Custodian under Section 7 (1) of the discrimination rights and interest in section 2 (3) irrespective of whether…
- SEERAT COMITTEE, MUZAFFATABAD v. CUSTODIAN OF EVACUEE PROPERTY 1982 CLC 1720
Sections 2 (3) and 7 (1) with respect to the evacuation property are also interested in Custodian under Section 7 (1) of the discrimination rights and interest in section 2 (3) irrespective of whether…
- HAJI SHAH MUHAMMAD v. CUSTODIAN,EVACUEE PROPERTY 1982 CLC 2039
Article 44 Writing in Writing Jurisdiction Applicants seeking trial and allotment of land before the Rehabilitation Officers in the possession of property in the case of Applicants, means the victims …
- STATE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN v. MUHAMMAD SADIQ 1982 CLC 2223
O XVII, r Failure to present evidence in a third party proceeds to proceed with judgment as expressly, with the words meaning the court must proceed to decide whether the trial court within a reasonab…
- MUSHTAQ AHMAD FAROOQ v. MUHAMMAD YUSUF 1982 CLC 2341
Section 13 (f) alleged misconduct by a solicitor with a professional misconduct lawyer did not coincide with his duties as a solicitor authorized, however, if he had any misconduct and unlawful conduc…
- CHIEF SECRETARY OF AZAD JAMMU & KASHMIR GOVERNMENT v. MUHAMMAD MANSHA KHAN 1982 CLC 2505
Read with the Evidence Act (I of 1872), Section 35 allegations of misuse of vehicles used in the logbook of government log vehicles did not prove that they were recorded by the driver of the vehicle, …
- SULEMAN v. KHURSHID 1982 CLC 2511
And the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Courts and Laws Code, 1949, is inherently desirous of the court's jurisdiction to raise its objection to the party's [jurisdiction] when the court suffers from a jurisdi…
- SARDAR BEGUM v. AHMED KHAN 1982 CLC 2545
Section 42 leave to appeal, which may not be usual by the Supreme Court; the serious question of law should be removed from the plea of lower court fixed by the lower courts on the basic principle of …
Other years — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir
2015 · 2014 · 2013 · 2012 · 2011 · 2010 · 2009 · 2007 · 2006 · 2005 · 2004 · 2003 · 2002 · 2001 · 2000 · 1999 · 1998 · 1997 · 1996 · 1995 · 1994 · 1993 · 1992 · 1991 · 1990 · 1989 · 1988 · 1987 · 1986 · 1985 · 1984 · 1983 · 1982 · 1981 · 1980 · 1979 · 1977 · 1975 · 1974 · 1973 · 1972 · 1970 · 1969 · 1968 · 1966 · 1965 · 1963 · 1962 · 1958 · 1957 · 1955 · 1954 · 1953 · 1952 · 1951
Case law is provided for information only and is not legal advice. Need help with a matter like these? Find a verified lawyer in your city.