Find a Lawyer

DR. ROIDAD SHAH versus M. ZAHOOR

The date of hearing of the application for ex parte decree for the AX, Rr 13 and 6 Special Relief Act (I of 1877), Section 42 suit declaration was the date on which the earlier proceedings were initiated in which to file Wakalatnama. Was set for And the written statement that was not the date of the hearing was dismissed by the trial court. The legitimate applicant was abroad and was neither served nor was there any alternative way of serving. The trial court will provide the applicant with an opportunity to be produced before being placed in the previous parliament. Proof of why he was absent and whether he was actually abroad ? The trial court initiated the proceedings on a date which could not be considered as the date of the hearing and also accepted the appeal without a court decision. Was removed and the former party order was set aside. The case is subject to payment of Rs.

Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2013

• QEMAT BAHA v. GOVENRMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA 2013 YLR 2403
• SARDAR AHMAD v. Mst. ZEENAT BIBI 2013 YLR 2439
• KALU KHAN v. ABDUL AZIZ 2013 YLR 2481
• MANZOOR HUSSAIN v. ABDUR RASHEED KHAN 2013 YLR 2488
• Mst. NAGEENA v. State 2013 YLR 2522
• Mian SAEEDULLAH JAN v. Mst. NUSRAT BEGUM 2013 YLR 2553
• GHULAM HUSSAIN v. SONA KHAN 2013 YLR 2566
• ABDUL RASHID v. Mst. SHAHIDA PARVEEN 2013 YLR 2616

All Peshawar High Court NWFP judgments of 2013 →

best law firms from Gawadar lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes