M.A. SHAMI versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, LAHORE
O IX Rr 8, 9 & OI, R 10 Specific Relief Act (I of 1877) Constitution of Pakistan, Sections 42, 12 and 54, Article 199 Constitutional Application Suit, Declaration of Performance and Permanent Prohibition Suit Exempted to 2 Defendants were subsequently dismissed for unlawful prosecution of the third plaintiff for non-submission of processing fees; the plaintiff's request for restitution of the case was cleared under OICR 9, and the CPC All three defendants were re-presented in this case, the third defendant filed an application on August 10, the CPC praying, since the other two defendants The case against Lehan was already dismissed at the time of the non-prosecution's dismissal, so he was responsible for excluding the defendant from the list, saying that the defendant's request was dismissed concurrently on the basis that the rehabilitation. After the suit was born, the dispute between the parties was whether the suit was restored to the position after litigation or when the suit was dismissed for non-prosecution, the suit restored to the position after the restitution. When he was excluded from the non-prosecution suit when his default will be restored to his post. Where it was rejected for illegal prosecution and all orders from a prior date were issued. The dismissal will come alive and show frustration. Any orders related to the restoration of the case are set aside from time to time, however, orders for the removal of the courts have been granted, according to the Constitution Petition,
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012
