Article 26 (6) Electricity Theft Bill Civil jurisdiction, jurisdiction over question of law. The impact of the WAPDA (Defendant) dispute was when a detection bill was issued against a user in connection with the measurement. Equipment was not a matter of civil court In the case the suit was pronounced simultaneously, a bill to determine the accuracy of the meter was dropped, the bill was issued in the jurisdiction of the civil court for measuring equipment. He was banned in connection with the theft charge. This aspect of the above case is left to be considered, as the question of the law can be raised by any party, even by the court itself, by approving the decisions and decrees passed. It needs to be examined whether to extend its jurisdiction. Whether or not the party will not be prevented from raising objections to the proceedings before the proceedings is merely that it did not raise any objections to ignorance or to seek the appropriate advice, neither to the party's silence nor to The waiver gives the jurisdiction of the court neither the law nor the question of jurisdiction will go to the root of the case. All the proceedings should be made unconstitutional by failing the entire proceeding and the court must decide before making the verdict illegal and invalid. The suit was remanded in the trial court without touching on the merits of the case. The hearing was set aside. The court was directed to accept the review of the jurisdictional objections in the case
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2015
