Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD NASIM versus ZAFAR IQBAL

Article 75 Supreme Appellate Court Gilgit Baltistan Rules 2008, A XVII Contempt of Court contempt (I 2004), sections 3 and 4 contempt of court for respondent's counsel for publication of defamatory statement in violation of the Supreme Appeal Court's decision I kept a copy of my office order. Implementing the Supreme Appeal Court's decision, directing the applicant to pay the due date from the date of removal of the applicant from the post, said that his complaint has been resolved and he has no interest in acting in contempt of court. The same issue was dealt with. With the instruction that the applicant's liabilities be paid without further delay

Related judgments — Supreme Appelate Court Gilgit, 2010

• SUO MOTU CASE NO. 6 OF 2010 2010 GBLR 420
• INAM-UL-HAQUE v. State 2010 GBLR 422
• PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary, Gilgit-Baltistan v. SAFAR KHAN 2010 GBLR 423
• ZAFAR IQBAL MD NACTO, GILGIT-BALTISTAN v. MUHAMMAD NASEEM 2010 GBLR 424
• HASAN SADPARA v. GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Ministry of Defence 2010 GBLR 426
• SUO MOTU CASE NO.9 OF 2009 2010 GBLR 427
• ZAHEER KHAN v. PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT through Chief Secretary, Gilgit-Baltistan 2010 GBLR 429
• SUO MOTU CASE NO.13 OF 2010 2010 GBLR 430

All Supreme Appelate Court Gilgit judgments of 2010 →

best advocate from Swabi lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes