Find a Lawyer

BARKAT ALI versus NADIR KHAN

Plaintiffs' claims of Article 42 civil code of conduct (v. 1908), Articles 12 (2) and 115 suit and allegations of fraud, provided that the defendant's testimony was adhered to by the Qur'an and that the deposed person did The suit was sold to the father. The defendant, his case can be dismissed Syed's offer was accepted and accordingly the witness confirmed it and the case filed by the plaintiff was eventually dismissed by the petitioner, who was the brother of the plaintiff, Filed a petition under section 12 (2), the CPC alleges that the plaintiff had already sold the shop in favor of him in the dispute, and that this decree had him as a party between the plaintiff and the defendant. Was passed without enforcement and in this case the decision was based on fraud and collusion which stated that the application was dismissed, dismissal Filed a complaint against him and claimed that his request could not be removed without recording evidence in this case. In fact, the brother was living in the same village. It was in these circumstances, it was very difficult to know that the applicant. Was unaware of the litigation that his brother initiated against the defendant, as was returned in 1988 against the plaintiff. Was dismissed, fought to the High Court when his review request was dismissed. If this was a collective matter, then the brother of the plaintiff / applicant would not have challenged the decision in the High Court unless The petitioner of the High Court had filed the petition under section 12 (2). , After the CPC rejected the review filed by the plaintiff, said that Durkh attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Mithi lawyer