MUHAMMAD YASEEN versus 1ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, HYDERABAD
Article 42 Civil Code of Conduct (v. 1908), Section 11 and O VII, R11 Constitution of Pakistan, Article 199 Constitutional Petition Rejection of Prosecution's Judgment, Contribution of Rule of Facts to the Respondents Before Decision And the property was handed over to him, applying the jurisdiction of the applicant to the court of competent jurisdiction, while another area challenging the defendant's possession was filed, The case was dismissed, so if the equality between the parties is finalized, then this challenge will not be challenged. He could. Applicants that his or her property was violated by the defendant, unless it was shown that the executions were made after the execution of the execution and the nature of the individual's request for any new cause. The accused was not charged for the case and the following courts did not do enough justice. Disapproving the applicant's claim, the dispute between the parties set forth below by the courts is not guaranteed to interfere with the exercise of constitutional jurisdiction, as it was a factual dispute and the scope of constitutional jurisdiction was limited by the applicant. There was no case of interference, and the second round of litigation was nothing but an attempt to defeat the earlier results, but the requests were dismissed in due course.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011
