MUHAMMAD IQBAL KHAN & COMPANY THROUGH ATTORNEY/MANAGING PARTNER versus PUNJAB PROVINCE, THROUGH SECRETARY, COMMUNICATIONS AND WORKS DEPARTMENT
In section 34 and 41 of the Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908), section 151, O. VIII, RR2 and 1 of the 10 suits, they were sued for recovery of Rs. The application was filed under OVII. , R 10 and 5151, CPC, with the request that the KK civil court have granted the jurisdiction to entertain the case and dismiss the case to appeal the appeal against the dismissal order. The appeal raised by the court was made by the court. The Plaintiff was that he had no objection to settling the matter through arbitration in the matter of agreement between the parties but it was stated that the tender was accepted by the defendants in L, therefore the courts of L had territorial jurisdiction. The plaintiff further argued that the appellate court wrongly made the wrong decision. The interpretive accuracy record of the letter issued by the defendants revealed that the interpretation presented by the plaintiff to the trial court as well as to the High Court was not correct. I accepted the tender by the rates which were conveyed to the appellate court which justified that the courts had no jurisdiction over the subject in which the plaintiff failed to identify any had lived. The High Court erred in invalidating the legal jurisdiction
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
