Find a Lawyer

PAKISTAN TELEPHONE CABLES LTD. versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE

Section 196 Reference Application Principle No free order was actually approved in the case of the applicants for the exchange of printers, but in another case the order was passed, whether the relevant modes were applied to these matters. Based on which the cases should be finalized. The concept of mandandes of the variables was outdated. Customs authorities should have passed separate orders in each case stating that the lieutenant had the right to know that his case was related to his own facts and not to any other case. On the facts of the hearing. In spite of the fact that the facts will be treated as equitable to the lower court and the authority adjourning these cases was remanded so that both sides could have the opportunity to freely state the facts of each case. Have heard

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011

• PUNHOON JAFFERY v. State 2011 YLR 2803
• TARIQUE v. State 2011 YLR 2818
• TAYYAB v. State 2011 YLR 2836
• COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, KARACHI v. POWER ELECTRONIC PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD., LAHORE 2011 PTD 2837
• ZAHID HUSSAIN v. State 2011 YLR 2853
• COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS v. QASIM IRON MERCHANT 2011 PTD 2853
• INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIES LTD. v. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS 2011 PTD 2861
• IRSHAD ALI v. State 2011 YLR 2861

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2011 →

registration advocate from Ghuzdar lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes