Find a Lawyer

AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR GOVERNMENT THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY, MUZAFFARABAD versus ABDUL RASHID

Section 42 (10) (11) of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974, did not exclude anyone from appearing before the appellant on the date fixed for hearing on the appeal before the Supreme Court. had gone. According to the notice of the Registry Officer, the appeal hearing will take place on the due date. After the notice was served on the appellant's counsel, there was no justification left for the lawyer to note the due date for hearing the arguments in the appeal in his diary. The merits were decided because the parties' valuable rights were included, which was not recognized as a motive for restoring the appeal, which was excluded by default for absenteeism. Appellants had to inform their own lawyer about the next date for hearing the appeal because there were most of the 11 appeals, though they were government officials, but they could not recover their appeal on appeal date. His ability to contact and discuss his lawyer for discussion or his lawyer failed to show any good reason for the appeal's appeal, which would have led to the failure of the appellant to appear, as well as to restore his lawyer's appeal. No request to apply for features has been deleted advocate for immigration from Balakot lawyer