Find a Lawyer

FAIZULLAH KHAN versus MST. MIRZAGO BEGUM

Receiving a case relating to the signature under AXX, Rr 13 and 18 and O XL, R 1 administration, the designation of the withdrawal was an unregistered document that was not read and the plaintiff received the signature or thumb mark. Prior to this, no suggestion was made to the plaintiff during the cross-examination that he had signed or deliberately given the thumb impression on the eviction process with his conscientious knowledge that he was missing property from his late father. Receiving their share No credibility can be attached to this document Defendants were unsuccessful in proving that they had contacted Shariah The father paid the plaintiff's share of the property left by his deceased father and did not give up his share and was entitled to the preliminary injunction of the plaintiff's estate, assed and received by his father's late father. The recipient was assigned

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2015

• PAKISTAN NATIONAL SHIPPING CORPORATION v. PIONEER STEEL MILLS LTD. 2015 CLC 1418
• CHAWLA RUBBER AND PLASTIC INDUSTRIES (PVT.) LTD. v. CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 2015 PTD 1428
• MUHAMMAD ZAFAR v. State 2015 YLR 1446
• Syed ARSALAN IQBAL v. GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Interior, Islamabad 2015 YLR 1460
• DANYAL ENTERPRISES v. A.G.E. AND SONS (PVT.) LTD. 2015 YLR 1507
• SHAZEB PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES LTD. v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Chairman, Finance Division, Islamabad 2015 PTD 1532
• SAFE LIFE (PVT.) LTD. v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary/Chairman 2015 PTD 1555
• Syed RIAZ HAIDER v. FRONTIER CORE CONSTABULARY FOUNDATION TRUST 2015 YLR 1569

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2015 →

famous supreme court advocate from Shemier lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes