Find a Lawyer

ALI MUHAMMAD versus MUHAMMAD BASHIR

Sections 39 and 42 of the Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), O II, R 2 are charged with possession of a suit against the plaintiff in retaliation for the non-prayer of claim in the cancellation claim. The presence and suit possession cannot be filed for the asset because the case was available at the time of filing the present suit to the plaintiff. The second case, if filed, was banned under O II, R2. Goes, the CPC plaintiff had nothing. In the absence of a claim for such action, the trial is canceled because of the right to claim and the claim being invalid.

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2012

• MAQBOOL AHMAD v. FAZAL-I-HAQ 2012 SCMR 917
• EXECUTIVE DISTRICT OFFICER (REVENUE), DISTRICT KHUSHAB AT JAUHARABAD v. IJAZ HUSSAIN 2012 PLC(CS) 917
• BAZ MUHAMMAD KAKAR v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Ministry of Law and Justice 2012 PLD 923
• SECRETARY SCHOOL OF EDUCATION v. Rana ARSHAD KHAN 2012 PLC(CS) 929
• GHULAM SARWAR v. Qazi MUHAMMAD BAKHSH 2012 SCMR 935
• IRSHAD MUHAMMAD SHAH v. HESCO 2012 PLC(CS) 939
• ABDUL JABBAR v. Mst. MAQBOOL JAN 2012 SCMR 947
• ABDUL REHMAN v. ZIA-UL-HAQUE MAKHDOOM 2012 SCMR 954

All Supreme Court judgments of 2012 →

famous high court advocate from Kala Bagh lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes