ABDUL QADOOS versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, RAWALPINDI
Delay of more than 14 years, Section 5 and 14, for rejecting the decision passed in the review petition by Section 12 (2) and 115 Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Section 5, 14 and Article 181 Offers the grounds for rejecting an application under section 12 (2) of the Contempt of Limitation Act, 1908, for non-filing of application under the CPC ban on the candidate's expectation of being banned. It was stated in a separate paragraph requesting a review along with his affidavit that he had been pursuing the matter before proper. Clearly forums, therefore, there was no delay in filing a review request and the delay, if any waived by the High Court, could hardly qualify as a request for condolences to such paragraph. No such details are mentioned in this paragraph. To justify the delay of more than 14 years from the delay of each day to justify the acceptance of the application under section 12 is no fraud, fraud or misrepresentation. (2), the CPC was shown that the adjudication was uncontested and the Supreme Court dismissed the application and refused leave to appeal.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
