MST. SAMEENA AKHTAR versus MUHAMMAD HANIF CHAUDHRY
Objection to section 47, 51, O XXI, Rr 59 & 60 order was given in lieu of that device. The Executive Court summoned the Secretary Union Council with the original marriage registrar and the bridegroom, where there was no such condition in the copy of the marriage contract and the bridegroom refused to insert such text in his hand. The Secretary-Union Council is instructed to furnish a copy of the record (fourth leaf) available on the record and there was no condition that the execution court inquired and that all proceedings were made in the presence of the lawyer of the protestor. There was no objection. Acting on the manner and inquiry of the object being investigated by the execution court in silence, the estoppel prepared to aggravate the case against him in a timely manner if the objectionable mode and manner of inquiry. If not satisfied, she could have been incensed at bringing the matter to the attention of the execution court, demonstrating that she was satisfied with the investigative procedure, but without objecting to the entire proceeding of the objector in this regard. And after the approval of the attachment order by the court's adjudication between the parties to the judgment. While the withdrawal was issued fake transactions was to separate the property right to object was forged, and it was ordered. In order to frustrate the execution of the decree in favor of the litigants, the legal proceedings began after the court's decree that devices were adopted by various courts to frustrate them.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012
