Find a Lawyer

FAHMEEDA BEGUM versus ZAFAR IQBAL

Section 13 Pre-marital Trial The trial court dismissed the case for pre-occupation by the trial court and the same was upheld by the appellate court; the court presented by the plaintiff was that The plaintiff in the plaintiff did not mention the place, time, as well as the mention of the meeting. Where he allegedly acted as knowledge of the controversial sale, the parents did not mention in the plaintiff how and when they came to the knowledge of the sale, nor was the informant examined. Information was recorded at this time and place. The cases were properly approved by both the courts, under which the High Court rejected the review petition. \ r \ n

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011

• USMAN NOOR v. State 2011 YLR 686
• NAZAR KHAN v. State 2011 MLD 688
• SAADI AHMAD v. State 2011 YLR 689
• Hafiz IQBAL AHMAD v. State 2011 PCrLJ 693
• M. YAQOOB v. GHULAM RASOOL 2011 YLR 697
• Z & J HYGIENIC PRODUCTS (PVT.) LTD. v. COLLECTOR SALES TAX 2011 PTD 697
• UMAR SHAHID v. State 2011 PCrLJ 701
• SADDIQUE S. KHAN v. ZAFAR ULLAH KHAN 2011 CLC 702

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2011 →

advocates from Lahore lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes