Find a Lawyer

IMRAN RAZA SHAIKH versus MST. ZARINA GUL

Karachi Development Authority Order 1957 Article 131 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), OVII, R 11 suit against the Karachi Development Authority Plaintiff, approving the mandatory notice of non-compliance of Article 131, Karachi Development Authority Order 1957 by private respondent only. The trial court raised it. On such request, the plaintiff was rejected under OVII, before the R 11 CPC plaintiff filed the case, addressed a notice to the Karachi Development Authority through his lawyer stating that The plaintiff is suspected of being illegally transferred to the residential premises as a neighbor. Commercial B, the private plaintiff, had clearly stated in the notice that setting up a school in the premises violated the terms of the Karachi Development Authority lease and ii. If the aggrieved plaintiff fails to give up the idea of opening a school, the plaintiffs Karachi Development Authority approached the High Court o Take immediate action against the premises owner for violating the terms of their lease. Along with the development authority, a cantonment board was made, which was the defendant in the plaintiff's case. That the trial court erroneously rejected the plaintiff because the petition itself did not raise the request of the bar contained in Article 131 of the Karachi Developer Authority Order 1957 which made such notice to the Karachi Development Authority in Article 131 of the Karachi Development. Compliant compliance. Authority Order, 1957 considered under Article 131 of the Karachi Development Authority Order, 1957, only the Karachi Development Authority can apply for it and the benefit of this time may not be extended if the private respondents are made the defendants. immigration advocates from Garh Maharaja lawyer