Find a Lawyer

FOUJI CEMENT COMPANY LTD. versus HAKAS (PVT.) LTD.

On the section 30 arbitration award, putting aside the corruption and calling for evidence of the arbitration, the court scope petitioner requested the arbitrators to be called as witnesses, but the trial court denied them the trial court's validity that the arbitrator be a judge. Could not be summoned because the witness was the arbitrator to examine the applicant and to examine the witnesses and to present a positive evidence as to what kind of discrimination was mediated by the arbitrators or as the High Court directed. Applicant can inspect his witnesses and present evidence and if there is positive evidence Is. To be brought to the record to prove prejudice, then the trial court may summon arbitrators accordingly as amended.

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011

• KHAWER PAPER MART v. NATIONAL TARIFF COMMISSION 2011 PTD 2243
• Mst. BASHIRAN BIBI v. AZMAT ALI 2011 YLR 2250
• Mst. SATTARAN BEGUM v. DISTRICT JUDGE, KHANEWAL 2011 YLR 2254
• MUGHAL-E-AZAM BANQUET COMPLEX v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary 2011 PTD 2260
• Malik SARFRAZ KHAN v. SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB MINES AND MINERAL DEPARTMENT 2011 YLR 2268
• MUHAMMAD NAEEM v. State 2011 YLR 2272
• ABDUL JALIL v. State 2011 YLR 2276
• AKRAM MASIH v. State 2011 YLR 2279

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2011 →

jobs for advocates from Darya Khan lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes