O XXXVII, Rr 3, 4 and O IX, R 9 Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Article 164 leave Request for leave to be granted for leave submission and illegal proceedings and to approve the preceding order. The petition for leave to recover the leave application and the ex-parte order was filed for more than 30 days after the trial court upheld such application, rejecting it, which the appellate court ruled was appropriate. The plaintiff's petition was retained under OX, R9, CPC, which had a 30-day restriction under Article 160. The defendant of the Limitation Act, 1908, failed to justify his absence on the date of dismissal of the leave, the defendant left the court in the process of execution and promised to pay the reparation amount and pay it. Had requested for time, instead to pay the plaintiff a petition to set aside an order under which the defendants could not approve and could not proceed again, The plaintiff failed to show any particular situation as an ambassador. There was no irregularity or illegal action as I was not present. The High Court dismissed the review request.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
