Find a Lawyer

ZAFAR versus GHULAM MUHAMMAD

Under Section 115 and O IX, R 13 Demarcation Act (IX of 1908), Article 164 Ex, the aforesaid injunction, was represented by the defendants by their counsel keeping the relevant facts by the courts and The due date fixed for the evidence of the defendants, the defendants or their lawyers did not appear and the case was dismissed on 23, 2002, under AIX, R13, CPC, on 26 4 2002 for the defendants. The trial court dismissed the request to revoke the former party order filed by the appellate court and the appeal was also permanently represented by the appellate court-approved defendants through their counsel. Therefore, their case would fall under the first part of Article 164 of the Limitation Act, 1908, if one was referred to the defendant's counsel, not the court or the plaintiff. In the circumstances there was sufficient reason to reject the previous injunction against the defendants \ r \ n law websites from Kamra lawyer