Find a Lawyer

CH. MERAJ DIN versus MST. BIBI NOREEN AND COMPANY

Section 44 ??? Civil Code of Conduct (v. 1908), O IX, R 6 Ex parte decree Distribution of factual disputes The plaintiffs' complaint was that the government, completing the project without compensation to the contractor, excluded the plaintiffs from their lands. Made land compulsory. In order to fill the excavation, the trial court had passed the previous party's decree against both the defendants, which was contracted by the contractor, therefore, the order should have been approved against the government, It was only the government's acknowledgment. The contractor had excavated the land outside the boundary for the purpose of identifying a legitimate competition between the contractor and the government and there was nothing that prevented the government from raising the facts dispute. , Whether by amending their written statements without doing so without the High Court. Keeping the order in favor of the plaintiffs, the remand was obtained by the trial court to resolve the dispute between the contractor and the government, after taking evidence, the High Court decided to split the trial court on the one side to the contractor. Directed and under this the government allowed other amendments. list of advocates from Shedani sharif lawyer