Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD RAMZAN SHAKIR versus MUHAMMAD MUSHTAQ

The trial court issued a summons to the defendant on the basis of A. XXXVII, RR 2 and 3 Litigation Act (IX of 1908), Article 159, on the basis of a check for leave to appear for leave and a claim for defense claim, But it could not be presented to the defendant, who appeared before the trial court, but only 11 days after appearing in court, a leave application was filed for his defense and defense. The trial court said that the ban was being applied at the time of application even though he could not serve, but he later voluntarily appeared 11 days after his appearance for the trial court and his leave to appear and defend. When the petition was filed, under Article 159 of the Limitation Act, a period of 10 days was granted for submission of leave to appear in the case of sanctions, and when it could be summoned It is not considered that if the summons cannot be summoned, and the defendants appear before the court, the limitation period never begins on the date when the summons The trial court appeared before the trial court, finding that the defendant had learned of the institute suit in the history that he had appeared in court and had filed the petition after the expiry of ten days. Was withheld from time to time under Article 159. The trial court of the Limitation Act, 1908, did not constitute any illegal or material misconduct in excluding the defendant's request for leave to appear, and the trial was time-barred because of a time-barred trial. had gone. divorce advocates from Battagram lawyer