Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ARIF versus BAHADUR KHAN

Family Practices Regarding the Law and Practices of the Law Practitioners and Bar Councils 1976 R 173 Soldiers' Litigation Act (IV 1925), Sections 7 and 12 for the Care and Possession of Children by Professional Misconduct Plaintiffs / Wives Defendant issued a summons against her husband, who was serving in the military. Plaintiff's brother wrote to the Judge Family Court on behalf of the commanding officer that the defendant conducts an operational military exercise, that he was not in a position to appear in court on the due date for the plea that he The case should be adjourned for another date. A copy of the letter (prepared by the defendant's brother in Family Court) representing the plaintiff's wife was obtained and a letter was written to the plaintiff / defendant's brother to confirm the letter. The complainant / defendant's brother alleged that he had filed a complaint before the cross-border council. Direct correspondence with military personnel is not a breach of the provision of this section. S7 and 12 of the Soldiers' Legislative Act 1925 were against the provisions of the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act 1973 and under Plaintiff's brother of the order / complaint made had prayed that due to professional misconduct, the advocate should take appropriate action against him. Under the relevant law, only the acts of an advocate were barred under 173 under the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Rules 1976, that is, without appearing before a lawyer as an Advocate Advocate. Could not communicate or appear in front of a public officer. Plaintiff b top advocates from Jalal Pur Jatan lawyer