Find a Lawyer

PRINCE AZIZ-UR-RASHID ABBASI versus BEGUM KATHERINE ABBASI

A VII, Rr 10, 11 and Section 115 of the Special Relief Act (I of 1877), Section 42, relied on the material sued by the principal against the agent, without the authority having the plaintiff acting without the special authority of his general Attack on their property transfer through an attorney. In this regard, the trial court also returned the plaintiffs under oh VI, R 10 instead of rejecting the plaintiff, the CPC Appellate Court set aside the order passed by the trial court, refusing to dismiss the plaintiff. And remanded to the trial court for trial. After the virtues were verified the power of the General Attorney was brought into dispute and challenge, requiring evidence from both parties to prove their point of view and affirmations, there were many factual questions and disputes, Were found in the case and had to be resolved. There was no jurisdiction to summarize the evidence, examine / record the parties' record on the merits of the trial, and the order / decision granted by the appellate court to hear it. l Defective, the CPC amendment was rejected in the circumstances, attracting the High Court jurisdiction under section 115. family advocate from Jauharabad lawyer