Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM versus JALAL DIN

Sections 96, 99 and 99 of A. XLI, Rr 1, 20, 33 after the appeal was restricted to a limited extent by the appellate court requesting the applicant's non-enforcement of the pro forma defendant in the appeal. Denied the request of the donors which had no relief. Pro-Pharma Defendants have claimed that such Pharma Defendants cannot be considered a mandatory party of appeal so that in the absence of such party the appeal may be disqualified where such Pharma Defendants are deemed to be a suitable party. As such, the lower appellate court had sufficient powers under CPCLOLI, R20 and 33 that at any stage of the appeal such a party could be allowed to enforce. The appeal was therefore not excluded. It could be said that the appeal was invalid and illegal lawer from fb area from Washuk lawyer