Find a Lawyer

ROOHULLAH versus QUBAT

Section 12 (2) Special Relief Act (Constitution of 1877), Sections 42 and 54 constitution of Pakistan, Article 199 Constitution Petition, separating the evidence, non-recording of suit under trial and the plaintiffs through their counsel Permanent order filed by the terms was declared in terms of section 12 (2), the award of nominations by the arbitrators was filed by the CPC applicants after more than one year and more than seven months. Which was raised by the trial court by the petitioners. Frame issues and recorded evidence were not valid when it was not necessary for the parties to record supporting and contradictory evidence in the trial, when there was no element of fraud and misrepresentation on the record, the High Court intervened in the judgment. Denied and two court-approved injunctions below dismissed the petition

Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2013

• COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, FEDERAL EXCISE AND SALES TAX CUSTOMS HOUSE, QUETTA v. MUHAMMAD USMAN 2013 PTD 2116
• COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALES TAX v. ABDUL RASHID 2013 PTD 2217
• MOULA BAKHSH v. State 2013 YLR 2407
• NASIR ALI v. GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN through Secretary Board of Revenue 2013 YLR 2500
• Dr. MUHAMMAD ABDULLAH v. GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, MINISTRY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 2013 PLD 1
• ISHAQUE v. RASHEED 2013 PLD 6
• MUHAMMAD SALEEM KHAN v. GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, MINISTRY OF RELIGIOUS AFFAIRS ZAKAT AND USHER 2013 PLD 10
• ASMATULLAH KHAN v. GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN 2013 PLD 13

All Quetta High Court Balochistan judgments of 2013 →

criminal advocate from Kalar Syedian lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes