Find a Lawyer

MST. KOUSAR BEGUM versus MATLOOB HUSSAIN SHAH

R3 (1) of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Family Courts Act, 1993, Sections 5, Schedule, and Sections 7 and 22 of the Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), O. VI, Rr 14 and 15, Dowry, Rehabilitation and Rehabilitation. The refusal to sign the collective rights and not verifying the investigation strengthened the appeal of the Shariat Court suit, and in light of the parties' requests, matters were settled when the case was in the final argument phase, the defendants on the ground Appeal for the dismissal of the cases was rejected by the rejection court that neither signed nor confirmed the rejected cases, such as Azad Jammu and Kashmiri The plates were found to be unsigned and unverified as required under R3 (1) of the Survey of Family Court Procedure Rules, 1998. Rule 3 (1) of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Family Courts Procedure Rules 1998 showed that a plaintiff was required to sign and confirm the word using this word, but it escalated. This principle has been cautiously stated that no penalty was provided for non-compliance with the rules, in which case the position of the director had to be interpreted and not required when the consequences of failure to comply with the law. Not provided. With the direction in it, this direction should be interpreted as a directory and not mandatory. The impugned orders were set in the direction that the Family Court would take further action according to the law, after providing the parties with a hearing. inheritance advocates near Theing Jattan More lawyer