MIAN MUHAMMAD RASHID versus MUSHTAQ AHMAD
A. XVII, Rr 2 and 3 provided more than ten opportunities for the appellants to present their evidence for damages for defamation, but at every date their evidence was either not available or suggested. was done. Appellant had the opportunity to present his evidence at the last opportunity to go to trial, but the appellant's evidence was not available at that date, after the trial, after the trial, the trial court granted the appellant's evidence. At the end of the, his claims were dismissed after he was terminated. In this regard, they were given the opportunity, the court having the power to dismiss the case by seeking both RR 2 and 3 of the O. XVII, without any legal liability of the CPC trial court The matter was not to be postponed indefinitely. Time, even subject to the payment of expenses, as it may result in severe injustice to the opposing party who faces the curse of litigation and such expenses will not be compensated for the costs.
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
pakistani advocates Kurram Agency lawyer
