TRUST SECURITIES AND BROKERAGE LIMITED THROUGH AUTHORISED OFFICER versus DR. SYED SIBITUAL HUSNAIN
Constitution of Pakistan, Article 199 Constitutional Court Appeals Court to Suit for Damage Demanding Suit for Demanding Damage The plaintiff claimed that the civil suit was not intact after the declaration of the Defamation Ordinance, 2002, contempt of court. Filed before the issuance of the ordinance, 2002, which was not enforced with prior effect where a law was repealed or amended, the pending action at the time of annulment will be decided under the revoked law. The law is not repealed nor the language of the notices is being threatened or the offending plaintiff's The theory that he suffered humiliation and suffered mental distress because he could not think that the public read the notes aloud, did not disclose when the evidence presented by the plaintiff received the notice. The written response to was not exhibited without any benefit from the un-written response. In the cross-examination there was no claim for damages claim, the case could not proceed. The evidence presented by the plaintiff could not establish that the notice of demand was defamatory and caused mental agony against which the statutory law provided for the notice of demand, which was merely a reminder. Take any action within the stipulated time. The courts have misused the evidence extensively. According to the law, every citizen was an essential right of every citizen. The notices were not published or the plaintiff's widespread circulation caused damage to the plaintiff's widespread circulation
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
