Find a Lawyer

SAID ALI versus SAFDAR ALI

Sections 115 and 151 of the Litigation Act (IX of 1908), Article 181 regularly exclude revision after admission to the hearing; a request for rehabilitation was granted six months later. I missed the hearing date. The High Court denied the request. Emphasis was placed on legitimate ground, nor was it possible to deprive respondents of their valuable rights over time, as long as the High Court had arbitrary jurisdiction, unless one case I will not interfere in this matter. The applicant was used in violation of the disputed principles of reconciliation or law, justice and equality that no deadline was set for the revival of civil revision and thus he could move the petition within three years. Is, was not accepted accordingly. Applicants regarding the letter and the spirit of the law did not have a strong case for eligibility as a dispute regarding homeownership, whose gift was claimed in favor of inheriting their brothers and sisters in their favor. Their outstanding shares have been deprived. Both the courts had obtained considerable justice against the petitioner; there was no specific question of law of importance of common justice with the parties. The petition was raised, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition best advocate from Dandot lawyer