O XXXVII, Rr 1, 2, 4, O IX, R 13, OV, Rr 6, 18 and 19 hundred suit on the bills of the Exchange X Part Decree, deciding to set aside a decree filed under the provisions of O XXXXI, In accordance with the CPC jurisdictional special circumstances as used in O XXXVII, R 4, the CPC convention suit for recovery of money was declared a former offense against the defendant, and the defendant's former party The petition for separation of orders was dismissed on August 18 and 19, in the service affecting the defendant and the requisition, in the present case the CPC sought to influence the defendant's services. Did not comply with the requirements of, and reliance of the defendant on OV, R 19, the CPC location was invalidated because the present service officer's examination was required only if OV, R17, CPC A summons was sought under which the terms were dealt with when the defendant refused to accept the service or when he could not deal with the matter. Ho fou refusal to accept the ND service or finding of defendant has not been the case in the present case as used in O XXXVI, R 4; It was tougher as OI, R 13, CPC and one person, who demanded the separation of the previous Partition Order, which was approved under AXXIII, present special circumstances to the CPC. In this regard, the court had to be satisfied that the petitioner failed to show such special circumstances to keep the former party decree, review was dismissed.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
