Find a Lawyer

MIRPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY versus MUHAMMAD HANIF CHAUDHRY

The Code of Civil Procedure 1908 Section 96 Litigation Act (IX of 1908), Section 5 was filed by the appellant against the delayed appeal of the original decree, appeal to the trial court's decision and injunction to a maximum extent. , In order to preserve his decision in the affidavit filed by the appellant with a delayed condolences and no notice was issued to his counsel stating that the appellant at the trial had filed four of his declarations. It was only months later that I learned of the verdict against them. No offer was made for the trial court's decision and the decree and the delay in the announcement of the verdict 22 days after the date of trial and the interim order issued by the trial court showed that After hearing the arguments, the date for the declaration was fixed. Decision and judgment was not announced on that date; further date was fixed. Decision was announced for the date and the judgment was announced by the trial court. The question of issuance of the notice was not raised, in the circumstances the appellant claimed that the verdict was made and in his absence The trial court had declared and in the absence of his lawyer, a landmark decision was announced without a due date, if the lawyer who did not appear on the due date to hear the decision, he On the basis of this, no condolences could be claimed that the court had not declared the verdict in his presence. registration advocate from Hyderabad lawyer