Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ABBAS versus MST. KHURSHID BIBI

Section 42 Sue and Permanent Order Defendant Plaintiffs contend that their father transferred the suit land in their favor through Tamalek and that the defendants had sued Tamalak in their favor with the tax authorities. Filed against the original Tamil trial court with yogurt. The appellate court also rejected his appeal on technical grounds. The appellate court of justification did not justify dismissing the appeal on technical grounds, since the appellate court was bound to decide the appeal on merit, which did not accept the order, the appellate court remanded. Was instructed to decide the appeal with competence

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010

• LAL DIN v. State 2010 YLR 1175
• MUHAMMAD SHAHID v. State 2010 YLR 1177
• SARFRAZ AHMAD v. State 2010 PCrLJ 1178
• KHIZAR HAYAT v. State 2010 YLR 1180
• MEHDI HASSAN v. State 2010 YLR 1182
• HABIB AHMAD v. State 2010 PCrLJ 1185
• GHULAM FAREED v. State 2010 YLR 1188
• FATAH MUHAMMAD v. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (REV.)/SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER, GUJRANWALA DIVISION 2010 CLC 1192

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2010 →

jobs for fresh advocates from Timergara lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes