MUHAMMAD KHALID ALIAS KHALID HUSSAIN versus SALID HUSSAIN
OV, August 19, 20 and O IX, R 13 Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), separating section 42 suit ex parte decree, the trial court reversed the former party's decision and dismissed the appeal against the trial court's order. After leaving the appellate court, the defendants filed an appeal in the High Court, which was accepted and the decisions passed by the lower courts were set aside and the previous order was reversed and the case restored. One of the defendants claimed that his father had a different name. What was mentioned in the notice and that the processor server's report was against the former party was denied on the basis of the record that the plaintiff had denied. The trial is a trial court. It was not correct to pass the previous order on the basis of the report of the processor server when it was required to examine the processor server under R 19 of OV, CPC, under court service. Recording the appropriate service declaration before proceeding. And to review the processor server, which was not done in the case when the defendant had taken a special position to identify the true woman, if she was not the daughter of the woman mentioned in the notice. No further attempts were made. In order to affect the service, the High Court correctly found the wrongdoing while taking notice of the defendant's action against the defendant was not, in the circumstances, unnecessary under the law.
Related judgments — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir, 2012
