MUHAMMAD ARSHAD & CO. THROUGH MUHAMMAD ARSHAD versus ZILA COUNCIL, PAKPATTAN SHARIF, THROUGH DISTRICT NAZIM PAKPATTAN SHARIF AND OTHERS
Arts 199 and 185 (), excluding the High Court's constitutional petition, which was rejected for illegal proceedings, the High Court reinstated the petitioner's application for payment of costs, on this date. When the constitutional petition came up for hearing, it was found that the petitioner did not comply with the High Court order as he did not pay the expenses and even on the date of the hearing, neither the expenses were paid nor No request was made ???? Higher orders from the applicant to extend the time for payment of expenses The petition did not comply with the petitioner, its constitutional application was rightly rejected. No interference was guaranteed by the Supreme Court on an anonymous decision
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
