Find a Lawyer

GUL MUHAMMAD versus ALI MUHAMMAD

A. XLI, Rr 27 and 28 Additional evidence, preparing the petition for the applicants, claimed that the variation stated in the application for additional evidence was for land which was not part of the deceased's property and thus The land could not be made part of the property. The respondents of the victims have admitted that they have no claim against the personal property of the applicants. The request for additional evidence was made a waste decision approved by the High Court in 2003 and if they have a complaint, they can consult the competent forum to resolve it. Their complaint was dealt with accordingly for the preparation of additional evidence

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011

• NAWEED AKHTAR CHEEMA v. CHAIRPERSON, TEVETA 2011 PLC(CS) 803
• ALAM SHER MALIK v. MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK LIMITED 2011 CLD 806
• MOAZAM ALAM KHAN v. FULL BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB, LAHORE 2011 CLC 809
• NAVEED ABBAS v. State 2011 MLD 811
• USMAN alias KALOO v. State 2011 PCrLJ 815
• SHAHZAD HUSSAIN v. JUDGE FAMILY COURT, LAHORE 2011 CLC 820
• UMAR FAROOQ v. State 2011 MLD 822
• MEHBOOB v. State 2011 YLR 823

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2011 →

famous supreme court advocate from Swabi lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes