Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ASLAM versus LIAQAT ALI KHAN

Return of CPC Civil Procedure Code Order XXIII and Adjustment of Suits O XXIII, R 3 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) Impact of suit on non-compliance of a decree of consent by a party Under which the respondent was required to deposit a certain amount in lieu of the amount payable to the alleged vendor, the parties were instructed to ensure the legal heirs of the vendor, who were authorized by the vendor. The specific amount was to be paid out of the deposit. The applicant will not be able to deposit such amount under the full remittance and satisfaction of his alleged rights in the house as a result of which the sale will be canceled and the respondent did not submit the amount in question and extension of time. The court moved the portion of the amount that was to be submitted to the court and paid to the applicant by the date of extension of the directive, and the defendant was allowed to bond and present the balance for the relief amount on the property. But will remain as compensation. The legitimate applicant claimed that in view of the failure of the defendant to comply with the court order, the decision of the case should have been in accordance with the law. This arrangement shows the order of consent of the High Court; the request of the respondents without the consent of the applicant can not be varied. The petitioner's leave to appeal on the disputes raised by the applicants is considered in dispute. Was allowed to do best advocate from Jalal Pur Jatan lawyer