Find a Lawyer

FIDA MUHAMMAD KHAN versus FAZLE RABBI

O IX, R 13 Former Order, Defendant's Lawyer's Trial, on which the trial court directed them to issue notices, but no such notice was issued or served. , The trial court granted the former injunction and counsel for the absence of the defendants, but later on the request of the plaintiff appellant to reject such decree, the other defendants and injunctions The petition was also set aside, when the former parliament overlooked its earlier order in which the defendants and their counsel were given notice. Was directed to research. , Which was neither issued nor submitted to, shall be deemed to have been submitted unconditionally at the request of the other defendant once in the former Persian decree, then it shall be completely separate and all The trial court against the defendants had not issued the summons to the plaintiff after the decree of the previous party decree nor the action taken before it, which was an irregularity with which the justice was dealt with. There was a serious error. The defendant's appellant was admitted without notice and without the direction of the previous proceedings against him, the law was contrary to law. The High Court accepted the appeal and fixed the order and the earlier order without jurisdiction and against the mandatory provisions of the CPC. law firms from Padidan lawyer