Find a Lawyer

S.M. BUILDERS versus MRS. AMINA SATTAR

The Constitution of Pakistan 1973 Article 185 (3) was granted by the Supreme Court for consideration, whether the admission of an appeal on the basis of which it raised important questions of law, but denied interim relief in this case. There was a contradiction that led to the birth of the law. Appeared on the face of a mistrial record; was the High Court's Division Bench ruling persuading the appeal and refusing to grant interim relief to the appellants because the judges failed to appreciate that the order violated the law? The idea of equality in the front is ignored, when there are no discriminatory features. There was no good reason for imposing conditions on appeals in the civil suit, whereas in a connected suit, another property maker in the same area of Pir was not subject to any such conditions. Even though the Division Bench Judges may refuse for any reason without giving any reason to prove that in another case the defendant was the plaintiff, the order of dismissal was unconditionally dismissed and dismissed. And according to the order of the Division Bench, the Supreme Court suspended the interference of the single judge's order. If the High Court Single Judge concludes that the defendants have no other case of parima, the balance of the facility is not in their favor and the refusal of the injunction will not cause irreparable harm or injury to them. That is why the order was a request for a stay. The liability for the dismissal comes after concluding that the single judge may have imposed conditions that are similar to the same ruling on which he ruled that the plaintiff was not entitled. K family advocate from Kazi Ahmed lawyer