Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

MUNSHI versus MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE


O XLI, r 21 Section 115 can be ordered as well as restoring an appeal when (a) the defendant is not served, and (b) the defendant is prevented from appearing for good cause when a personal oath is made. Because of the failure to appear in the so-called hearing date, the remand of the Advocate Order was approved by the Additional District Judge on the ground that sufficient cause for absenteeism was disclosed, with no jurisdiction, Such an order is neither excessive in jurisdiction nor material irregularity passed, it does not guarantee the intervention of the High Court Section 115 [Appeal (Civil) Review (Amendment under civil jurisdiction)]

P L D 1979 Karachi 488

Before Ajmal Mian, J

MUNSHI‑Petitioner

versus

MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE AND ANOTHER‑Respondents

Revision Application No. 151 of 1973, decided on 25th November 1978.

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑

‑‑ O. XLI, r. 21 read with S. 115‑Appeal‑Rebearing of‑Rehearing of appeal can be ordered when (a) respondent not served, and (b) respondent prevented from appearing for sufficient reason‑Reason for non‑appearance on date of hearing supported by a personal affidavit of Advocate‑Order of rehearing passed by Additional District

Judge after coming to conclusion that sufficient cause was shown for non‑appearance‑Held, not without jurisdiction‑Such order, being neither in excess of jurisdiction nor passed with material irregularity, does not warrant interference by High Court in revisional jurisdiction under S. 115.‑[Appeal (civil)‑Revision (civil)].

Rahim Bux and others v. Gul Muhammad and others P L D 1971 Lab. 746 ref.

(6) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)‑

‑‑ S. 115‑Revision‑Concurrent finding of fact‑Cannot be set aside on ground that appreciation of evidence was not proper. [Revision (civil)‑Evidence].

Ismail Munshi for Applicant.

S. H. Riavi for Respondent No. 1.

Dates of hearing : 18th and 25th November 1978.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Phoolnagar (Bhai Pheru) lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.