DR. M.A. AMIN versus FAISALABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Clauses 54 and 54 together with a permanent injunction in connection with the disputed property claim that the defendants had contracted to sell in his favor and that the plaintiff was the owner of the same plaintiff on the basis of the said agreement. Was announced as the one who fought the case. The trial court, on the eve of the appeal, dismissed the case from the appellate court, as well as dismissing the request made by the plaintiff, which would allow him to withdraw the appeal with fresh permission. Because the plaintiff had some technical errors. Without discussing the merits of the case and the legality of the trial court or the illegal judgment and decree passed by the trial court, the appellate court dismissed the appeal which was material misconduct by the appellate court, The appellate court had identified itself. The perplexing decision that it heard on the parties' sole argument is whether the appellate and appellate court's appeal should be allowed to be withdrawn with permission to re-enter the application, while the appellate court rejected such request, If the appeal was not dismissed, it would have led to an abortion without hearing the parties' arguments on the merits of the case. It was the material irregularities of justice and the appellate court that the High Court needed to correct. The High Court granted the request for review and set aside the appellate court's decision and order and sought remand for hearing and the parties' arguments on the merits of the case. Likewise, no further evidence should be presented to the parties positively within a month's time and by the High Court.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
