Find a Lawyer

PROJECT DIRECTOR, K.D.A. KOHAT versus MST. FARKHANDA JABEEN

Section 35 A Special Relief Act (of 1877), Section 42 Declaration of Suit for Compensation Expenses A plot was allotted to the claimant with tax The first installment was submitted to the claimant with tax, but the remaining installments could not be submitted in due time. The request of the Extended Plaintiff was allowed by the Defendants to submit the dues themselves, which was the Project Director and the Plaintiff submitted the arrears with late fees and surcharges in the name of the Plaintiff despite compliance with the defendant's order. Was canceled because he failed to convince the defendant to return. The cancellation order, because of the defendant's negative and defiant attitude, led to a civil litigation filed in the civil court once again. Good judgment cannot prevail over defendant because he took the path of confrontation and against it. When the verdict was reached, the case was fought to make it a matter of dignity. However, for consideration, the defendant did not leave an unclean pursuit and against the trial court's decision without seeking legal opinion from the competent authority of the appellant and it was stated that the appeal was also dismissed. The petition for review in order to rationally consider the resulting litigation with the citizen was dismissed at a cost of Rs. 5,000, stating that all costs incurred on the entire litigation were for the defendant. Receive from salary. top advocates from Phagwar lawyer