Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD RAMZAN versus MUHAMMAD MURAD

O IX, R 13 and O XXXVII, Rr 2, 3 & 4 suit for recovery of money on the basis of the disputed plea to appear and defend the side application, set aside the ex parte decree to recover the money. Was approved. The former party order has been filed on the basis that his summons did not affect the services, and he also said that he also applied for leave to appear and defend the case. An application was filed under which the former party decree omitted from the trial was set aside. The court, the defendants, had observed that the previous order for recovery of the money was approved on the basis of a controversial and recovery case that would be processed by the defendants even if it was accepted that Defendants were not served, even though no defense was shown by them. Their application, which requires a trial investigation, can apply for a defense hearing to appear and defend the application, after the pretrial order is finalized, to the former party adjunct to the AP No defense has been disclosed in the petitions for separation which, in special cases, the former party decree under AS XXXVII, CPC KR4 can be set aside and leave to defend the case to these defendants. Aliens who will be able to show special circumstances. The guarantee period for the separation of the preceding order was strictly for the purpose or good of the terms, and it would also include the merits of the case, which would appear in any defense to the removal or application of the previous order. advocate for immigration from North Wazirstan lawyer