Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD BAKHSH versus V-ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE

R13 Constitution, Article 199 Constitutional Petition for Recovery of Downer Application by the Applicants to Set aside the Prior Judgment Verifying the Request for Separation of Counsel Delivery Courts at the Concurrent Delivery Reports ????? The following courts clearly relied on the fact that the sincere district judge was not the applicant, the former party began to seek knowledge of the earlier decision to cancel the order, which was filed by the applicant under oath. Was according to The petition was received a week before the filing, and for this reason it was within 30 days that the petitioner's request was not heard, all the High Courts set aside the orders of the following courts. The applicant was entitled. Permission to contest the constitutional request accordingly \ r \ n

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2012

• DAWLANCE ELECTRONICS (PVT.) LTD. v. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, COLLECTORATE OF CUSTOM, KARACHI 2012 PTD 980
• IBRAHIM v. State 2012 YLR 983
• ABID ALI BAIG v. ZAFFAR ALI 2012 CLC 985
• SOHNO BULLO v. State 2012 PCrLJ 986
• AJEEB ALI SHAIKH v. PROVINCE OF SINDH through the Home Secretary 2012 YLR 992
• MAHMOOD-UZ-ZAMAN KHAN v. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK (PAKISTAN) LIMITED 2012 CLD 993
• MAZHAR v. State 2012 MLD 994
• Dr. PIRZADA JAMALUDDIN A. SIDDIQUI v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Education 2012 PLC(CS) 996

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2012 →

famous lower court advocate from Sibi lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes