MUMTAZ AHMAD versus AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN THROUGH CHAIRMAN
A. XLI, R 19 Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Section 5 Appeal The decision of the dismissal for illegal prosecution meant that his lawyer could not be presented due to illness. The Judicial Lender did not attach any prescription or medical certificate to the petitioner to show that his lawyer suddenly became ill, although the lawyer for the judgment debtor filed an affidavit in support. The contents of his plea, so far, did not benefit from his affidavit, but the Supreme Court did not consider the ground of sickness as a good ground for restitution or reappeal of an appeal. Judicial charge also failed to show any reason for his absence History of dismissal of appeal High court delayed refusal and restored appeal in circumstances
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
