Find a Lawyer

WAPDA THROUGH AUTHORISED ATTORNEY versus CRESCENT GROUP OF SERVICES THROUGH AUTHORISED PERSON

Article 14 of the Office of Federal Ombudsman (Ombudsman) Order 14 of 1983 (1 of 1983), counting the period of limitation without the jurisdiction to exclude baseless performance, the fiduciary ombudsman, the federal ombudsman was not Therefore, the court cannot grant the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1908, to anyone who used any time before the deceased oath and excluded from the prescribed time for filing the time spent before the deed. Could not be done

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013

• EHSAN-UL-HAQ KHAN v. GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB through Secretary Agriculture Department, Lahore 2013 PLC(CS) 212
• BASHIR AHMAD v. QAISAR MEHMOOD 2013 CLC 214
• MUHAMMAD ASHRAF v. State 2013 YLR 216
• Mst. NASREEN FATIMA v. The BANK OF PUNJAB through Manager 2013 CLD 218
• AKBAR ALI v. DISTRICT POLICE OFFICER 2013 YLR 222
• FAISAL ILYAS v. Rana ASIF MEHMOOD 2013 PLD 224
• AASIM SAJJAD SIDDIQUI v. MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK LTD. 2013 CLD 224
• ALI AHMAD v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, SIALKOT 2013 YLR 226

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2013 →

famous lower court advocate from Multan lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes