Find a Lawyer

SADIA MUHAMMAD ZAHOOR versus AUN SAJEED HASHMI

Section 8 Civil Procedure Code (V8 1908), O XXXIX, R 2 (3) contempt of court Act (LXIV of 1976), sections 3, 4 and 5, sought restoration of two plots for possession, the plaintiff claimed. The petition, which was secretly opposed by the defendant's lawyer, also said that the plot's ownership was too high under the cloud, as the settlement records were manipulated and the anti-corruption department The inquiry was initiated on behalf of, but was terminated due to the fact that the plaintiff's predecessor had obtained a case. In the previous order, the present case was filed in respect of different plots so the plaintiff's application in respect of the plot being discussed was not, therefore, a viable claimant, in another application under O XXXXX, R 2 (3), c. The PCs read Section 3, 4 and 5 of the contempt of court Act 1976, on the basis of the Nazir of Court report, the contempt of court proceedings were requested against the defendant that the wall of interference between the two plots was demolished. The request has not been processed. Its uncertainty has to do with the interpretation of the court's order as well as the involvement of the plot in this case and the privilege of the parties in connection with it, and it has been considered that the plaintiff's reference to the pending plot. The title is still to be cleared and retained. The request for another plot by the claimant was excluded in connection with the case in respect of the plot \ r \ n family advocate from Mir Ali lawyer