SAFDAR JAVED versus LAHORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THROUGH DIRECTOR-GENERAL
O VI, Rr 17, 18, O XXII, Rr 3, 6 and section 115 Appeal restitution Appellant's death Not filing the amended appeal Appellant failed to file the amended appeal, yet the Appeal Court through the Appellate Court Has dismissed the appeal. Against such a failure, the appellants filed a petition seeking restoration of the appeal that their lawyer's mother had passed away and as such, the amended appeal could not be filed within a timely manner and the appeal was reinstated. ? The appeal for non-compliance with the provisions of O XVII, R 3, CPC, O VI, R 17, CPC was not attracted to the consequential result under O VI, R 18, CPC was settled only if When Petty failed to amend the conditional application. This amendment was sought under OVI, R17, CPC and the requirements were fulfilled, in the case of O VI, R18, the CPC was attracted, so the appellate court decided by default. The Court could not dismiss the appeal. No weakness or illegality was found in the order of the appellate court using the jurisdiction of the review and it was retained in the circumstances the review was excluded.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
