SH. MUHAMMAD ISMAIL KHAN versus LAHORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, THROUGH DIRECTOR-GENERAL,
OI, R10 (2) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional Petition Petition was filed for a permanent injunction on the execution of the petition, in which he prayed that the authority responded to the question on the plot. Their construction should be prevented from demolishing. Under OIR 10, the CPC which was accepted before the trial court and the review petition filed by the applicant against the trial court order was also dismissed. He did not present any title in respect of the property in question, while the respondents wrote in a letter stating that the plots pending in his name were omitted, the two courts, OY, R 10 (2). Was used accordingly. ), The CPC and it did not justify the applicant with reasonable reasons. The observations made in the interim orders of the trial court below were not binding on the trial court at the time of deciding the main case, which was decided by the respective parties. Based on the evidence made, the trial court was directed to decide the main case without affecting the case. According to the Appellate Court and High Court observations as per the law as soon as possible
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
