Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ASLAM versus LAEEQ FAHEEM

O. XXXVII, Rr 1 and 2 Failure to furnish the defense strike guarantee, the trial court allowed the petition for defense under the bail bond before filing a written statement. Ali did not comply with the trial court's order, which resulted in his right to defense. Defendant's failure was rightly considered by the trial court, which properly upheld defendant's right to defend the High Court, who refused to interfere with the trial court's order.

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011

• ALI SHAN v. FAZAL DIN 2011 YLR 2773
• Syed GHAUS MUHAMMAD v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, SAHIWAL 2011 YLR 2778
• Sayyed HANAN KHALID GILANI v. DISTRICT JUDGE/PRESIDING OFFICER DISTRICT CONSUMER COURT MULTAN 2011 YLR 2780
• FURQAN ALI v. State 2011 YLR 2788
• PLYFO INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD., GUJRANWALA v. ASSISTANT COLLECTOR (AUDIT-I), SALES TAX AND FEDERAL EXCISE, GUJJRANWALA 2011 PTD 2795
• Mst. RUKHSANA BEGUM v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MULTAN 2011 YLR 2796
• MUHAMMAD KHALIL v. INSPECTOR-GENERAL PUNJAB 2011 YLR 2800
• MUHAMMAD ANEES v. State 2011 YLR 2805

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2011 →

famous lower court advocate from Daur lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes