Article 5, Schedule and Section 17B Law Reform Ordinance (XII of 1972), Article 3 Constitution of Pakistan, Article 199 Intra-Court appeals maintenance suit for marriage, restitution, dower and interest on dowry articles, trial court Has rejected the request from the claimant to record their statements. The plaintiff challenged the trial court's order through constitutional petition; the single judge, the high court upheld the trial court's order that the questions related to recording the statement through the commission could not be answered because the plaintiff had filed the complaint. Was challenged to revoke the potential of nature. However, the single judge, the High Court, observed that the defendants could record their statement by appointing the accuracy of the attorney laid down by section 3 (2) of the Reform Ordinance 1972, where the petition filed under Article 199 of the Constitution / Submission expires. Action in which the law provides for at least one appeal, one revision or one for any court, tribunal or authority against the original order revising section 14 (3) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act 1964 Appeal against the interim order was withheld by a controversial court order which was granted under section 17B of the West Pakistan Family Courts. Act, 1964 was an interim order which was neither applicable nor renewable under section 14 (3) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964, on the issue of the ban of section 3 (2) of the Law Reform Ordinance 1972. Not implemented. Section 3 (2) of the Law Reform Ordinance 1972 was to reduce the number of legal remedies available for litigation so that cases could be settled.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
