SOOMAR versus BASHIR AHMED
7th XVIII, R 17 The plaintiff's closing side application for the opening of the same court, after examining the plaintiff's testimony, remained vacant for some time and was subsequently closed by the plaintiff. No order was approved on behalf of Tile Opening. And the defendants were allowed to present their testimony that the application to open by the plaintiff, filed under OXVIII, R 17, was pending and no order was passed on and subsequently non-speech. It was removed with the restriction of the order whose order could not be declared. Since the order of Judicial Syed was set aside and the trial court was directed to examine the plaintiff's testimony in the case and to finalize the case within a certain period.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
famous lower court advocate from Rajanpur lawyer
