Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD FARYAD versus MEMOONA NAZLI

Section 5, Schedule and Section 14 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional application suit for the recovery or cost and maintenance of articles, the plaintiff presented evidence, after which the plaintiff presented evidence. Directed to present your evidence. But he failed despite numerous occasions, including the last one, and his defense was closed. The family matter was to be decided immediately and the trial court informed the defendant about it and gave him a last chance to present his evidence. But he failed to do so. Guaranteed to interfere with the High Court in the jurisdiction of the Constitution was unable to identify any illegal interference or material irregularity in the decisions and decisions of both the courts

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010

• Miss SABOOR v. KASHIF SOHAIL 2010 CLC 840
• MUHAMMAD ASHRAF v. GHULAM HUSSAIN 2010 CLC 841
• MUHAMMAD AQEEL alias KHALIL AHMAD alias GHANDHI v. PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through District Collector/District Officer (Revenue) Sahiwal 2010 YLR 841
• MERAJ DIN v. Mst. SARDAR BIBI 2010 MLD 843
• STATE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN through Chairman v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE-I 2010 CLD 845
• MAHI KHAN v. SALMA BIBI 2010 CLC 846
• SHEHZAD-UR-REHMAN v. State 2010 YLR 846
• AAMIR HAMEED v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, FAISALABAD 2010 CLC 847

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2010 →

immigration advocate from Mirpur (AJK) lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes