ZAIB COLD STORAGE AND ICE FACTORY THROUGH SOLE PROPRIETOR versus MESSRS PAKISTAN INDUSTRIAL LEASING CORPORATION
The Banking Court's territorial jurisdiction for the collection of loans of Sections 9 and 22, the defendant contends that the Lahore court has no jurisdiction, the matter was located in the plaintiff / factory Sialkot and the documents were processed. It was not good for the deal. Who provided it: The lease agreement has entered into Lahore and the parties have agreed that the courts of Lahore will have exclusive jurisdiction over any legal proceedings arising out of or in connection with this lease agreement. I acknowledged and agreed to the implementation of the agreement. The Lahore court will decide the matter, the defendant cannot successfully request that the court of Lahore has no jurisdiction to entertain, try or decide the matter which, through the Banking Court, 8. The order passed for the sum of Rs. 00,700, however, was not inconsistent with the previous results of the court as the court specifically noted that the claim of the plaintiff corporation was accepted and to the extent of lease on machinery. Nor was the order to provide car finance, according to the operating section of the banking court order, Rs. 8,00,700 The order includes the rent of Rs 1,51,750 in the car was the result of a mistake in the order which needs to be corrected. To reconcile the amount of data with the results and the decision, it was directed that the decree issued by the Banking Court be Rs.6, 48, 950 (8), 00, 700 minus 1, 51,750).
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
