Find a Lawyer

AVARI HOTELS LIMITED versus INVESTMENT CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN

Sections 42 and 54 of the Special Relief Act 1877 (v. 1908), sections 151, 152, 153, OI, RR 6, 10 and AXXIII, R3 Contract Act (IX of 1872), declaration and permanent injunction Section 43 Suit for Disposal Settlement of the contract in the terms of the agreement without deciding the plea of the proposed participant prepared under the OI, R 10, CPC, responsible for the party to the same contract The co-plaintiffs proposed to deal with it were not private, finance and restructuring, of which the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the bank against the plaintiff as a party and the defendant. He was the agreement between compromise and agreement was shared by the other party as the plaintiff, which had accepted the proposed co-plaintiff has certain rights and responsibilities. Against the defendants, on the basis of which the judgment was pronounced, the proposed plaintiff pledged to relinquish the PLA's responsibility as a partner in the settlement agreement. In this regard, the interests of all the defendants who are banking companies and financial institutions will be seriously affected and will be at risk in the absence of the proposed co-plaintiff / partner agreement, the participation of the proposed co-plaintiff by either party. Will not cause prejudice but will protect the rights. And the interest of all parties to the co-plaintiff, if not the necessary party, had become the appropriate party to the proceedings, the decree had not yet been made, the CPC did not include any party at any stage of the suit or The High Court has approved the substitution of. This should also be considered during application review patent advocate from Hayatabad lawyer