Find a Lawyer

IQBAL M. HAMZAH versus GILLETTE PAKISTAN LTD.

O XXVI, R 1 Recording of evidence In this case, the decision of the Commission to save the initial decisions and time of the parties cannot be termed as misleading or contrary to the principle of natural justice, in the interest of both parties. If they had come out of the litigation. All technical matters should be avoided as soon as possible unless it is necessary to follow them on the basis of public policy The management of the English system on which the system was established in Pakistan may be somewhat technical, but this system Should not be defective Anyone who took a system that did not affect the form and did not defeat the material was the key, defective to the extent that Ideal was always a system that gave everyone the opportunity to bear the costs of the plaintiff's commission. Ready to do and no prejudice will be imposed as the plaintiff's High Court allowed the recording of evidence before the request of the local commissioner is allowed

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011

• ABDUL HUSSAIN KORAI v. PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary Government of Sindh 2011 PLC(CS) 273
• EUROCONSULT PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD. through Accounts Manager v. PROVINCE OF SINDH through Secretary 2011 PLD 275
• S.A.H. ENTERPRISES Inc. v. EXPORT PROCESSING ZONES AUTHORITY 2011 CLD 275
• Mst. DADLI v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Divisional Superintendent Pakistan Railways, Sukkur 2011 PLC 276
• Mst. ILYAS BEGUM v. PAKISTAN DEFENCE OFFICERS HOUSING AUTHORITY 2011 PLD 281
• AYAZ AHMED MEMON v. PAKISTAN RAILWAYS, MINISTRY OF RAILWAY, ISLAMABAD 2011 PLC(CS) 281
• TEAM NAYYER (PVT.) LIMITED through Authorized Attorney v. SUI SOUTHERN GAS COMPANY LIMITED 2011 CLD 285
• KHADIM HUSSAIN v. State 2011 MLD 288

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2011 →

best law firm from Haveli Kahuta lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes