Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD LATIF versus FAYYAZ AHMAD

The Constitution of Pakistan 1973 Arts 185 (3) and 1993 High Court accepted the constitutional plea with the observation that the defendant's lawyer stated that he would have no objection if the constitutional application was approved and that the unauthorized order had legal authority Was declared without. And with no legal effect, the respondents pleaded with the High Court that they were surprised by their lawyer when they came to know about the contents of the High Court order and in fact assured that they never confessed. Or made no statement that he would not mind. If the order dismissed in the constitutional petition was declared without legal authority and the constitutional petition was bound to be dismissed, the High Court dismissed the request for review along with the remarks that it was unfortunate that the petitioner's The verdict needs to be monitored for misconduct and thus he blames himself for the litigation, but the Supreme Court has relaxed the petition against the applicant to consider these questions. Appeal allowed for appeal and did not consider whether the High Court upheld both orders Rey was not at fault, which resulted in merit not being approved. Were these two orders not the same as reinforcing the orders entered in the Constitution, which were not in their own right that they failed to set aside the orders obtained by fraud, misrepresentation and concealment of facts? Whether respondent's conviction before the High Court in support of the review of the affidavit's constitutional petition power of attorney advocate Mandi Bahauddin lawyer