Defendant through alternative services through the trial court for recovery of money on the basis of OV, 20, 21, A, XXII, RR 2, 3 and Appendix B, Form No. 4 suit, note notes. Issuing the summons for 14-12 2011 at your foreign address. Because of not receiving information from his foreign address about previous summons, he was barred by the trial court's order on the defendant's lawyer's appearance in court on 3 1 2012 and the filing of leave application on 7 1 2012. The leave request was dismissed as being. There is nothing in the record to show that the defendant was sent by the court to the LL address given by the court in order to show that the record was sent by him or the mode defendant to his foreign address. The summons is not to be sent, the L record did not even reveal the defendant. The summons was avoided or the trial court did not meet the requirements of OV, R 2 before issuing the summons through alternative sources; the summons was not issued to the defendants in the CPC. According to Appendix B's Form 4, the CPC's publication of a summons in a newspaper published in Pakistan in Pakistan will not meet the requirement of the service of the plaintiff resident in a foreign country; While it was certified by the High Commission of Pakistan on 2 12 2011, its lawyer filed a memo to appear in the court on 3 1 2012 and filed a leave application on 7 1 2012, the trial court adjourned the affidavits. Defendant's leave request was affirmed, affirmed and affirmed by the Commissioner of Pakistan Pro-Note. Accusing
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
