Sections 3, 5 and 7 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional Application for the Recovery of Money from the Jurisdiction of the Court of Reconciliation, were filed before the Union Council Moderator, which referred the matter to the arbitrator. , The award was granted to the plaintiffs for the recovery of Rs. 26,100. And Nazim prepared a decree sheet against the applicant for Rs. 24,000 / - which was decided by Nazim, which was upheld by the appellate court. Word-of-mouth cannot be equated with the word institute because the court of reconciliation could not proceed directly with any of the plaintiffs before the moderator. Without jurisdiction and legal authority, the plea of the respondent cannot be considered by the respondents and the authority of the reconciliation court was dealt with under section 7 (2) of the Reconciliation Courts Ordinance, 1961, which was up to Rs 20,000 / part 1 Under the schedule of ordinance of reconciliation courts. Referring to the mat, 1961, in the civil case of the Union Council, the arbitrator in the civil case committed the unlawful proceedings, the proceedings initiated by the moderator were without jurisdiction and thereafter the lower appellate court and The Executive Court could not be sustained in the eyes of the law, if the primary order was without jurisdiction or quorum unconstitutional, then its ruling would have served the same end, as well as the section of the Court of Ordinance, 1961, Under 5, the Court of Reconciliation will fall, which is a body consisting of the chairman and two delegates, It could have been designated in a fixed way. There was nothing available on the record that indicated that
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
