Find a Lawyer

MOULVI MUHAMMAD AZEEM versus ALHAJ MEHMOOD KHAN BANGISH

Section 54 and Constitution 54 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) by the title court and the lower appellate court decisions, the final outcome of the facts by the courts below the administration of the suit of suit was ultimately decided in favor of the plaintiff. had gone. The following two courts maintained by the High Court in the exercise of the jurisdiction of the respondents that the High Court had no jurisdiction to constitute a committee to investigate the matter related to the misappropriation of funds. The Supreme Court did not interfere with the following courts where sufficient justice was done, it did not interfere with the exercise of powers under Article 185 (3) of the Constitution, which had discretion in the jurisdiction which created equality. In order to be found he must appear in court. The Supreme Court refused to exercise its discretion in favor of the defendant on behalf of the defendants.

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2010

• Syed KAMAL SHAH v. GOVERNMENT OF N.-W.F.P. through Chief Secretary 2010 PLC(CS) 809
• HASSAN DIN v. MANZOOR HUSSAIN 2010 SCMR 810
• ANEESUR REHMAN v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN 2010 PLC(CS) 812
• Nawabzada IFTIKHAR AHMAD KHAN BAR v. CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER ISLAMABAD 2010 PLD 817
• DEPUTY POST MASTER GENERAL, REGION-III, POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT, HYDERABAD v. MUHAMMAD JAVAID 2010 PLC(CS) 818
• SHAHID HAYAT v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN 2010 PLC(CS) 820
• BASHIR AHMAD v. MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN 2010 SCMR 822
• MUHAMMAD SHAFI v. SULTAN MAHMOOD 2010 SCMR 827

All Supreme Court judgments of 2010 →

advocate from Raiwind lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes