NOOR ILAHI versus MUHAMMAD ISMAIL
O XX, R 14 (1) (a) General Clause Act (X9 of 1897), the trial court held a petition seeking extension of effect from the delay of one day in the submission of the section 10 order. Rejected by request. After time, he arrived at the bank on 8 198 12 1983 (ie last date), his working hours were closed on 8 12 1983, the next day was from 9am to 12pm, ie 9 12. Holiday was due in 1983. Friday's decree holders could deposit the money in 10 12 1983, which did not work, but they deposited the same amount at a later date; Was in power because there was no such tender. The delay in the actual payment of a day in time, in each case, can be condoned by checking the conduct of the pre-emptor, which can be deposited the next day, and the circumstances of the case have kept the defendant in charge. Was set aside to take advantage of this. The rule, as there was no viable order in his favor that day, the High Court dismissed the request for review.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
online advocate from More kunda lawyer
