Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD YAQOOB versus AUQAF DEPARTMENT

Civil Procedure Code Order VIII and O VIII, R 10 & O IX, R 6 of the CPC Writing Statement Referred to the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Authorization Act (VIII of 1974), Article 42 respondents filed written statement despite several postponements Judicial Impact Against Failure to Defend The previous order and its defense, the High Court, gave the defendant another opportunity in the appeal to file a written statement on payment of certain costs. VIII, R 10, CPC's provision was applicable when the plaintiff was present and the defendant failed to file a written statement for which he was given the last chance that the court decide against such defamatory plaintiff. ? Defendant, O VIII, R 10, cannot avoid the consequences set forth in the CPC so that he and his lawyer can be kept out of court. Due to the absence of the counsel of the defendant on the important date of the High Court to make the court helpless, the decision was not correct that the previous order could not be passed. The High Court's view has been accepted that the absence of the lawyer. Due to the fact that the fresh notice should have been issued, it was also not correct. The court is not required to follow the plaintiff of the absentee lawyer every time he is ordered to be non-bailable while making the basis of the order under appeal. The High Court set aside the opportunity for the defendant to file his written statement and the trial court's previous order restored. advocate for immigration from Narang Mandi lawyer