Find a Lawyer

MST. GHULAM FATIMA versus MST. HUSNA

Under 12 (2), 115 and A VII, R 1 section 12 (2), changing the plaintiff in the application, before the CPC jurisdiction the appellate court's jurisdiction was arrested by the plaintiff in the present case. , The trial court dismissed the case. The appellate court ruled that it was not applicable in the present case presented by the plaintiff if the case against the order obtained on the basis of fraud and misrepresentation did not exist. The court was capable of changing the case. In the application under section 12 (2), the CPC apportionment suit was erroneously dismissed by the appellate court because, as a result, the court is fully capable of converting the plaintiff to the application or the file itself. To the court in which this decree is granted. In setting aside the litigation and the judgment filed by the plaintiff, the appellate court sent in favor of the defendant or the successor of the court to remove the unlawful technical skills. The High Court had set aside the matter for review jurisdiction. The case was remanded to the appellate court so that it could be handed over to the same court which passed the order in favor of the respondent for the judgment. top advocate from Ahmadpur East lawyer