Find a Lawyer

QAMAR-UD-DIN versus ABDUL LATIF

Article & Un Q Contempt of Martyrs (of 10 of 1984), Article 33 `The referee was a person invited to assist the parties and his personal opinion was sought to resolve the dispute. And his appointment was always with his consent. Parties; and it should not be investigated in any way, nor was it required to collect evidence. And in this particular case, the decision and the decree were to be based on his personal opinion, which would be equivalent to admission to the parties' suit and would have an inevitable effect.

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010

• Mst. FARMIDAH v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, KAROR, DISTRICT LAYYAH 2010 CLC 110
• AMJAD ALI v. MUHAMMAD BOOTA 2010 PLD 111
• MUHAMMAD ZAHOOR AHMAD v. State 2010 PCrLJ 113
• Ch. KHALID MUSHTAQ v. SPECIAL JUDGE (ADMN.) 2010 PLD 114
• SULEMAN v. ATAULLAH 2010 CLC 116
• NIAZ AHMED v. SAEED AKRAM 2010 MLD 117
• MUHAMMAD ANWAR KHAN v. SABIA KHANAM 2010 PLD 119
• MUHAMMAD ASIF v. SURRYA TABASSAM 2010 MLD 120

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2010 →

immigration advocates from Chowk Maitla lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes