Find a Lawyer

HAJI MUHAMMAD SHARIF versus CHAUDHRY KHAN

Sections 6 and 24 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), O. VII, R 11 A pre-arrest suit for a third of the undisclosed plaintiff's discovery of an adjoining court, before the lawsuit, before the trial Had also filed. The court directed him to collect one-third of the sale price, but since he failed to deposit the aforesaid amount, his case was dismissed under section 24 of the Punjab Pre-Emission Act 1991, the present trial defendant. Aliyah filed an application under OVII, R 11. The CPC refused to file a case that the case was stayed under section 24 of the Punjab Pre-Emission Act 1991, the trial court upheld the appeal by the law and the appellate court. Was denied. In 1991, a third deposit was mandatory in nature within thirty days, and the court was not authorized to extend the time to thirty days, according to which the Fresno fresh case filed by the plaintiff's wife d. Will not be enforceable because the previous case was dismissed for violating the required legal provisions of section 24 of the Punjab Pre-Emission Act 1991, amending the jurisdiction of any unlawful interference or absence of judicial decisions. Authorization cannot be interrupted Of the High Court famous supreme court advocate from Shujabad lawyer