LAHORE DIOCESAN TRUST, ASSOCIATION versus PAKISTAN RAILWAYS
Civil Procedure Code Order XXXIX Temporary Mergers and Relevant Orders Sections 115 and O XXXIX, Rr 1 and 2 Revision Case decided that respondent decided to deal with the property of the trial during the trial. This action could not have been done in the presence of a subpoena order, on the basis of the trial court's injunction order, the respondents were only banned from interfering with the applicant's possession or thereby taking any action against the applicant. Get started Impact Such an order did not prohibit the respondents from freely seeking property boundaries and did not suffer from lack of jurisdiction or was granted material misconduct where by trial court The order passed did not fall within its scope. Decision case decided, amended jurisdiction not eligible for H, which court refused to interfere with order passed by trial court review
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
