A. XXXVII, Rr 2 and 3 Demarcation Act (IX of 1908), Section 5 and Article 159 Delay in filing a leave application Respondent's request for delay in request was that such request was within time. As the trial court was closed. Due to the winter holidays, the order of leave granted by the defendant for the defense of the surety bond under the trial court order for up to nine days should be explained by the delay in the accuracy of each day, otherwise. The summary trial is to be an immediate remedy for the cases. As considered under O XXXVII, CPC, failure to explain the delay will result in the refusal of the leave application to a substantial extent to the defendant submitted to the processor server on 16 12 2009 Whereas, while the winter holidays were filed on 24 1, 2009, the leave application was filed on 5 1 2010 4 should be filed on 2010, i.e. the defendant started the winter holidays within ten days of such service. Can submit a leave application within seven days before the departure of nine days was a winter vacation because the trial court's only presiding officer was on leave, That during that period the office was open to the plaintiff the plaintiff failed to justify such delay in the leave application, the defendant did not file a petition under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1908, which he Need to file a day. The High Court set aside the immovable order
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2012
