Proof of contempt of Section 5 (H) and 6 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), O. VIII, R11 Case The plaintiff of the nature of the annual confidential report of essential accessories, a public servant was furious at the comments in his annual secret report, the defendant. Ali prepared the second. A civil servant trial court dismissed the allegations of non-disclosure of the cause of action. In order to commit the wrongful act of justification, it was necessary that at least one other person, in addition to the abuser, be dealt with. It is important to allege that the plaintiff slammed that the plaintiff lacked any such communication details and that misconduct was incomplete without miscommunication. The annual confidential report of a public servant was performed by the performance, performance and capabilities of its subordinate officer. Contains confidential feedback provided by the reporting officer about. The report suggested, such remarks were strictly kept under the provisions of the law. The annual intelligence reports formed part of the record of the authority authorized in the government to determine the feasibility of the service and the capabilities of the officer. has been. It was important that an objectionable conversation and the person to whom these statements were made in the alleged statements be disclosed to the extent that the false elements of the statement, injury to reputation or false statements resulted in the requisite components of a claim being exhibited. Are mandatory. The trial shows that the trial was properly dismissed for lack of trial because of the trial and the High Court refused to interfere with the trial court's order.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
