Find a Lawyer

MEHMOOD HUSSAIN SHAH versus MST. PARVAIZI BIBI

O IX, Rr 6 and 7 former order defendants were refused to appear in the trial The personal services of the defendants were not affected by the trial and they were kept ex parte on publication of the notice in the paper. Was not given the opportunity to present evidence at the hearing. To prove his position on the reasons for his absence, the plaintiff did not present evidence for the provision of appropriate services when the plaintiff was already under trial at the trial. An application for a previous trial was issued when the defendants could join the accused. After assigning the reasons and rights involved in the case, the trial court erred in rejecting the defendants' request without recording pro and contradictory evidence about their services and investigating their claim of property ownership on the case. Subsequently, the trial was presented to the trial court.

Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2013

• MUHAMMAD ZAMAN v. SIRAJ-UL-ISLAM 2013 YLR 1548
• MUHAMMAD KAMRAN SOHAIL v. State 2013 PCrLJ 1549
• NORTHERN BOTTLING COMPANY (PVT.) LTD. INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, PESHAWAR v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN 2013 PTD 1552
• NASIR KHAN v. LAL MUHAMMAD KHAN 2013 MLD 1557
• Dr. SAMIN JAN v. UNIVERSITY OF PESHAWAR through Vice-Chancellor 2013 YLR 1601
• Syed ANWAR BADSHAH v. CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY COURT, ISLAMABAD 2013 PCrLJ 1607
• MUHAMMAD SADIQ v. State 2013 YLR 1617
• SAJID HUSSAIN TANOLI v. NADIA KHATTAK 2013 CLC 1625

All Peshawar High Court NWFP judgments of 2013 →

immigration advocates contact from Ghuzdar lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes