Find a Lawyer

ZAHID AFZAL versus MST. FATIMA SAEED

Petitions for restitution and condolences dismissed for failure to appear in the constitutional petition of Article 199 Litigation Act (IX of 1908), requested that it move a request for a hearing on the matter. The office had objected that the constitutional petition had already been dealt with due to non-submission. That the settlement of the matter was not in the knowledge of the lawyer and the applicant, having observed the date fixed by the office, granted the exception that the applicant had also been delayed under Section 5, Limitation Act, 1908. Another petition was filed in which it was submitted that the bar clerk had failed to circulate the list of cases in the applicant's lawyer's office, and thus, in the knowledge of the applicants, the decision was not correct, both applications , One restoration and another delay, did not match service. Giving the list to the Advocates through the bar was just rewarding and in this case, a lawyer supporting the legislature did not have a list of scheduled cases to be heard, which is in the office, outside the courtroom. Or appeared to the barroom applicant. Failure to state why the trial was not inspected by anyone, neither his lawyer nor his attorney's office, without any evidence to support the recovery of the case without the applicant or His lawyer did not know it was not enough to recover the case, the title of the case, the number and the name of the learned lawyer for the applicant were written correctly in the list, the constitutional petitioner advocate for immigration from Kharian lawyer