Find a Lawyer

AMANULLAH versus HAQ NAWAZ

O XVII, R 3 Adjornments was conducting the trial of the plaintiff that the plaintiff was present before the trial court to record the evidence of the plaintiff but the lawyer of the plaintiff was absent due to the lawyer's strike, the trial court He did not record the statement, but instead of dismissing his legal status, the entire lawyers community of the country went on a series of strikes. During these days, all the courts of the country always looked a waste and the judges of the high courts This continued until the Emergency Rehabilitation and Rehabilitation in their respective offices. In a respectful manner the plaintiff cannot be punished in the circumstances

Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2013

• MUHAMMAD MUSTAFA v. State 2013 YLR 1123
• JANNAT KHAN v. CHAIRMAN NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, ISLAMABAD 2013 CLC 1134
• Mst. TARAJA BEGUM v. ZAINULLAH 2013 CLC 1144
• GUL RAZIM v. State 2013 YLR 1144
• GULAB DIN v. State 2013 PCrLJ 1160
• MOSAM KHAN v. GUL MUHAMMAD 2013 CLC 1161
• SAIF ULLAH v. Mst. SALMA BASEER 2013 YLR 1161
• FIDA MUHAMMAD v. UMAR KHITAB 2013 CLC 1171

All Peshawar High Court NWFP judgments of 2013 →

when you need a advocate from Lahore lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes