Find a Lawyer

MUBARAK ALI versus FIRST PRUDENTIAL MODARABA THROUGH CHIEF EXECUTIVE

Sections 14, 12, 9 and 22 of the Transfer Property Act (I82 of I82), Section 576 Civil Procedure Code (V8 1908), 0 11, R 2, 0 XXXIV, R 14 and Section 11 Appellant were not parties to the present case. And the respondents never relinquished any part of their claim against the appellant at the Anti-Justice Institute. The fact is that the respondents did not apply to the present appellant as one of the defendants in this case at the time of the institution. This will not justify the conclusion that the claim was made against the appellant on the basis of the equivalent mortgage while the creation of the mortgage and the execution of the proceedings and the submission of the title documents on the memorandum of the deeds done by him. Was denied. The proceedings against the respondents for obtaining a judgment against the appellant for the sale of the mortgaged property 0 11, R 2 and Section 11, CPC will have no relevance or applicable to the facts of the present case. Because the first case did not amount to an appeal against the appellant, the defendant had a free right to file a separate case in his favor to recover the unlawful amount from the extent of the equal mortgage made by him. , If he has chosen to appear in this regard. O XXXIV, R 14, CPC also would not be appropriate in the circumstances inheritance advocates near Hangu lawyer