Find a Lawyer

ALLAH BAKHSH versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE-I, D.I. KHAN

Section 128 (2) (f) and O VIII, Rr 1, 9 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199, in the constitutional application suit to recover the motorcycle defendants' balance price, it was stated that the plaintiff had already been fixed before the due date. Balance amount was received. Compliance with provisions O XV, CPC, two matters were settled and the plaintiff's postponement of proof for the plaintiff postponed the petition for modification of the written statement claiming that the plaintiff moved in lieu of the cost of his land tractor. Agreed to, but the plaintiff found that it was occupied by the tenant, nor was the owner's trial court dismissed any such request, which did not persist in the review filed by the defendant nor the plaintiff. No such land was transported nor tractor transported, thus adjusting the balance of the motorcycle for the alleged tractor cost. Fake, irrelevant and meaningless was a self-disobedient, unreasonable and irresponsible plaintiff calling for amendment 11 months to file a written statement and then forwarding such an absurd request for another five years. The suit was delayed for almost six years. In the event of a widespread misuse of the law process by the defendants, such a trial court should have imposed costs to cause unnecessary delays. Through such unwarranted petitions, the courts below used litigation, rejecting the constitutional application with costs and instructing the trial court to decide the case within a month. Allowed to present the evidence on the matters specified. immigration advocates email from Ukba lawyer