MUHAMMAD YAQOOB versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, ATTOCK
The petitioner's appeal against the trial court's former party decree for the receipt of Article 5 and the Schedule and Section 14 Constitution Pakistan, Article 199 restitution allowance was dismissed on the ground that the applicant sought bond on bail. Did not comply with the appellate court's order for submission. The purpose of filing a surety bond under the impugned order of the appellate court to suspend the trial court's earlier order was to pass the trial court's decision and order of injunction to recover the restitution allowance, and it has nothing Was. What to do with this important appeal that was to be decided on merit, the matter between the parties is to be decided on merit rather than merit, it was clear from the reading of Section 14 of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act 1964 The decision to file an appeal or the decree passed by the trial court was not provided as a condition to submit the data, nor in the present case, the petitioner approved by the trial court. Prayed for the suspension of the injunction, and the appellate court ordered them to serve a surety bond within a specified period. Was directed to ensure that only its execution is secure. This order had nothing to do with the adoption or disposal of the appeal under section 14 of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964. For this purpose, dismissing the appeal by the appellate court was an exercise. The appellate court order of the appellate court did not rule out such powers, which, under the circumstances, were offensive in the eyes of the law which were set aside and
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012
