A. XXXVII, RR 1, 2 and Section 96 Suit for Recovery of Money Based on Promissory Note, Suit for Recovery Based on Promise Note After the Trial Court's Decision, Defendant's Decision Appeals were filed against him and the order was passed on the trial. The court accepted the appeal on the same day, the execution of the improper judgment and the execution of the order amounted to the satisfaction of the court. Provided proper security, but the defendant failed to do so regularly. Appeal was applicable against only one order, but in the present case no order was filed with the appellant by the defendant, the circumstances were ineligible and the score was to be rejected only, otherwise on the question of the court. The time restriction was banned. As regards whether the defendant ever filed a lawsuit to vacate the promise and on the basis of which the decision was not made, the cell for the defendant acknowledged that the defendant had presented it before the Independent Forum. Had not challenged it before, if the plaintiff's lawyer had requested that the defendant's assistance from the record had been punished with time, except that the defendant had also advanced. Did not comply with the order passed by. The court, under which the defendant was ordered to furnish the appropriate security to the satisfaction of the execution court, in which there was no case, the defendants, the following decision was approved by the court, In the appeal to the High Court
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
