HAFIZ KHAN MUHAMMAD versus MUHAMMAD AZIZ
Sections 9 and 42 of the Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), the O. II, R2 plaintiff, without a retraction of the earlier suit for the declaration, were sued for dismissing the suit to settle the suit, the first case. The verdict was pronounced in the appeal but the second case was dropped. Technically, it was maintained that the second order was withheld under the second case of accuracy of O II, R2, CPC, so that better order could be made and consistency with the provisions of CPC was ensured. In the past, I was treated as a request for a modification of the case. After claiming that the plaintiff was the owner of the suit property after claiming that the claim was included in it, the appellate court took the wrong premises and held that the second case was prohibited under O II, R 2. In the same case, in the other case, the CPC Appellate Order was set aside by the High Court
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
list of advocates from Sangla Hill lawyer
