Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ASLAM versus AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN

Sections 9 and 10 of the Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), O IX, Rr 8 and 9 Not Settlement for Trial Settlement Suits for Illegal Prosecution Settlement for Arguments on Request to Defend First Trial Was, due to the presence of the plaintiff and the absence of his lawyer, the banking court removed the scope of the illegal prosecution application under OIX, R9, to set the order by the CPC plaintiff But was also excluded and there was no case. The plaintiff's restitution was that his lawyer was engaged in the High Court and the lawyer filed his affidavit in support of such a claim. If the plaintiff or his lawyer was absent that day, the best thing was that banking. The court could have accepted it. An application for leave to defend the suit but was not able to exclude the case, as the case was not set for trial was not the date of the hearing as it was considered under the law. So the case could not be excluded. r The Non-Prosecution Banking Court did not publicize the basic aspect of the case and proceeded mechanically to approve the dismissal order, which was not sustainable in law, as it passed without giving the law on the matter. In which the banking court failed. Consider the plea filed by the plaintiff for the absence of his lawyer, who was engaged in the High Court and in support of the claim, issued his affidavit by the banking court, which was not sustained by law. , Because it was approved. The matter and the law us immigration advocates from Dudial lawyer